Recording has begun.
Thank you.
Looks like we're pretty good cheer.
and we do have Sherman available as needed.
Okay, thank you.
We're ready to go.
Good morning.
My name is Bill Bergman
and I will be chairing this morning's EBA hearings.
With me is Carol Tenere, our vice chair.
Present, Mr. Chair.
Ismail Shahid, our board secretary.
Present, Mr. Chair.
Thomas Holliman, our board member.
and james snell our board member present mr chairman also with me is our executive director
director tanya sunkett and our attorney sherman top and we'll be on the line shortly
before we begin good morning before we begin here's our virtual format be advised the
proceedings are being recorded. By participating, you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded.
A video will be available by contacting tonyasunkett at phila.gov. For the benefit of our
court sonographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying. Three,
if you're participating by phone, if you wish to testify, press star nine to raise your hand
and star six to unmute. To enter an appearance statement, call 267-270-5548. Leave your email
and the address for the property in question. And lastly, note that the question answer box
on the screen is not for testimony or comments. Any comments have to go through our Executive
Director Tanya Sunken. And I'm going to start with our continuances for the day.
Number 12, MI 2021-004-902-5858 Woodcrest Street. That case is continued. Is there
anyone who has comments relative to that continuance? Good morning, Mr. Chair. This
is Jason Hand. I'm a co-host this morning. I do not see any hands, sir. Thank you, Mr. Hand.
Are there anyone else requesting continuances? Okay, sir. We have Mr. Bart Levy with his hand
raised. I will allow him to speak at this time. Good morning, Mr. Levy. Good morning.
What case, Mr. Hold on, Mr. Levy. Let me swear you. Mr. Chair, Tom is now on. Okay. Thank you.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do, Mr. Chairman.
Could you state your name for the court reporter and spell it, please?
I'm Bart Levy, B-A-R-T-L-E-V-Y.
I'm an attorney for case 4902.
I merely wanted to register my attendance today.
I thought it was proper to attend even when we...
I'm sorry.
Could we pause so he can swear you in?
I did.
Okay, thank you, Chair.
Mr. Levy, is that the 5858 Woodcrest?
Yes, sir.
Okay, good.
Thank you, sir.
We have it.
Thank you.
If I may, I seek permission to leave.
Thank you, Mr. Levy. You can.
Thank you, Mr. Levy.
You can.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Are there any other requests for continuances?
Are there any other requests?
Sir, I have Mr. Richard DeMarco with his hand raised. I will allow him to speak at this time.
Good morning, Mr. Chair and members of the board. Can you hear me?
I can. Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, Mr. DeMarco?
Yes. Good morning, everyone. Richard DeMarco, spelled D-E-M-A-R-C-O.
do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes i do what case sir 1925 north 19th street uh we are ready uh we have support from the rco
but i have a an emergency uh where i have to attend a 10 a.m courts conference i'm asking
to be moved to the end of the list and i will be back uh and my client is also aware
uh that's all right i'm asking the board's indulgence uh to be moved that that's fine
with me we'll make that the last case this morning i appreciate it the client is aware
thank you so much okay anyone else requesting a continuance
the chair i have mr jack hubert hand raised he has been allowed to speak
good morning mr chairman i'm jack i get miss good could you please spell your name for the
court report and spell it jack hubbard h-u-b-b-e-r-t i'm the attorney for the applicant
of 1802 harland street and we are requesting a continuance today to further deal with the
questions raised by the uh let me just swear you real quick you swear for him to tell the truth
the whole truth and nothing but the truth? Yes, I do. Okay. And you're working with the RCO you're
saying? Yes. Okay. Case continued. Thank you. Permission to leave. Thank you. Please. Anyone
else have a case to be continued? Mr. Sloan, folks, has his hand raised. I would allow him to speak,
sir. Excuse me. Mr. Folks, state your name and spell for the court reporter. Good morning,
chairman bergman and zba board my name is sloan folks s-l-o-a-n-e f-s and fire well k-s from the
office of councilwoman maria canina sanchez 7th district 508 city hall do you swear for him to
tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes i do sir what case do you want to
talk about? Case number MI-2021-00446215-64 Westbrook Street. So Mr. Folks, I think there's
an attorney involved in that. Are you going to request to continue? Yes, there is. Mr. Adam
Lever. Yes. Why don't I bring Mr. Adam Lever along? Is that okay? Yes, sir.
Good morning, Chairman Birdman, members of the board, Mr. Folks, Adam Lever of Blank Room.
Could you spell your name for the court reporter, please, Mr. Leaver?
Yes, Chairman Bergman, Adam Leaver, L.A.B. as in Victor, E.R., Blank Rome, 1 Logan Square, Philadelphia, PA, 19103, on behalf of the applicant.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, Mr. Chairman, I do.
Mr. Folks, why don't you start?
Yes, sir. Our office, understanding that the applicant has met with the RCO and has garnered a letter of support based on a community benefits agreement between the applicant and RCO, the Councilwoman would like to request continuance to further discuss the variance request and the community benefits agreement.
The Councilwoman has some questions with the cash payment to the RCO or the CBA in lieu of
affordable housing units that she has been the cornerstone of her agenda in the North
Square community as well as the 7th District. Mr. Chair, which case are we talking about?
Number two, number two. Number two, cash payments? 150 to 64 Westbergs. I got it.
so so sloan you're saying there was cash payments to the no no sir the cba right there was a cba
benefits agreement right and in the cba there is an arrangement where um the developer would
pay into a fund yeah that would that would uh assist uh assist uh community uh residents uh
in the in in the skcp catchment area sure so that that's that's you know that's that's so i'm sorry
if cash payment sounded no no that's fine that's fine okay thanks for clarifying
mr labor okay thank you mr chairman and members of the board um this has been a robust unusually
robust community engagement uh process uh there have been eight months of discussions with the community
eight months of discussions with the community five uh five formal meetings with the community
with the coordinating rco which was selected pursuant to the zoning code by the council
member's office my records also reveal that uh we reached out as a courtesy to mr folks
on behalf of the council member just shy of two years ago.
My records show April 7th of 2020 was the first outreach that I had.
We very much respect council member Quinonez Sanchez and all of her staff
and are committed to ongoing discussions with the council member.
However, there is no requirement under the zoning code by which this case is being reviewed concerning the issue that Mr. Fulks has raised.
So very respectfully, we ask that we proceed with this case, which has been supported appropriately by the coordinating RCO and other members of the community,
and allow me to put on the record that I and the developer are committed to offline continued
discussions with the council member. Oh, one additional fact, Mr. Chairman, this case was
already continued once, and it went through the civic design review process in which the council
member's office sat on that review through Mr. Fulks, her representative, and the coordinating
RCO, of course, had a voice in that. Mr. Fulks, do you have anything you want to add to that?
Everything Mr. Laver said was accurate. Actually, when I checked my records,
he did reach out to us during COVID. I specifically remember having that discussion
in my automobile uh back in 2020 so all of those things are accurate um the the point
the salient point is still uh that the council member um does have uh the concern at this moment
um clearly uh the uh the developer and and and the tear team has done their due diligence regarding
the project um but uh unfortunately um we didn't really review the cba or the councilman did have
opportunity but that's not true councilman didn't see the cba until a day ago um and again she has
some concerns if the uh and if the um the the board is so inclined to hear uh this case today
we'd ask for a uh a a a hold for a while the councilman still would like to have for the zoom
meeting between the um rc with the rco and the uh the and mr laver's uh uh uh team uh to further
discuss this okay all right so we're going to go on with the case and then we're going to have
vote at a different time so you can you can have your meeting wherever you want okay thank you mr
chairman sloan did you hear that so you'll be available for that i heard your number two on
the list. Thank you, sir. That makes sense. Okay, thank you. Anyone else have a continuance?
Sir, Mr. Vern Anastasio has his hand raised. I will have allowed him to speak at this time, sir.
Good morning, Mr. Chair. Good morning. Could you state your name and spell it for the court
reporter? Yes, sir. It's Vern Anastasio, A-N-A-S-T-A-S-I-O. Do you swear or affirm to tell
the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do proceed what case thank you i was uh
i'm just uh raising my hand not for continuance but for uh two withdrawals and i wasn't quite sure
if you were folding withdrawals in what what what's what cases it's a 70 106 caster avenue
and 407 south 20th
20th street is already tagged in the system as withdrawn but i'm not sure 7106 caster is so i
wanted to bring it to your attention
number seven one is caster number seven is caster avenue yes sir
and that's 9 30 7106 9 30 number 7 is is 20th street i got that i got what's the other one
of 7106 castor avenue it was scheduled for this morning
oh mr chairman it's number 13 okay
Thank you, Vern. Appreciate it. Withdrawing.
Thank you, Vern. Appreciate it. Withdrawing. Thank you.
Thank you. Have a good day.
Thank you.
Anyone else?
I'm sorry, Chair. Would it be possible to state them individually into the record? Thank you.
I will.
So, 4-0, here it is here, MI 2021-004-968-407 South 20th Street.
and MI 2021-002848-7106, Caster Avenue.
Both cases are withdrawn.
Okay, any other cases?
Okay, I'm going to go.
Sir, I have a hand raised with a number that ends in 3552 with the hand is up.
I guess I'll speak out loud to speak at this time.
Please unmute and wait to be sworn in, sir, madam.
Could you state your name and spell it for the court reporter?
Yes, my name is Adrienne Fernandez, A-D-R-I-E-N-N-E-F-E-R-N-A-N-D-E-Z.
Wait one minute. Do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
I have a question about the withdrawal listed on the ZBA calendar for 502 West Clapier Street, 19140.
You're withdrawing that, ma'am?
She's asking for a confirmation if it was withdrawn.
I guess you weren't on.
I was on it before you started, but no one mentioned that address.
Oh, Mr. Chairman, it's number 11.
I know, I know, but that's, I haven't withdrawn that.
That case is not withdrawn.
It's on the calendar.
It's now withdrawn?
No, no.
No, it's on the calendar to be heard.
It's on the calendar.
I'm sorry, Chair.
Mr. Consul is the attorney for that and has his hand raised.
If we need clarification, please allow him to be sworn in, Steph.
Good morning, Joe Consul.
Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Yeah, Joseph Consul, C-O-N-S-O-L-E.
Right.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I do. Is that case ready to go, Mr. Counsel?
I have two cases today. Clapier Street has been withdrawn.
Okay, hold on a minute.
MI 2021-004-904-502
West Clapier Street, withdrawn.
Thank you, Mr. Counsel.
Any other continuances?
Sir, I have Mr. John Taylor with his hand raised.
I have allowed him to speak at this time.
Good morning, John Taylor. T-A-Y-L-O-R. Prepared to be sworn in.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
What case, sir?
I represent 2121 Dickinson Street, calendar number M120.
Yep, it's number five on our list. Are you ready to go with that?
we are ready to go we requested a continuance on friday but we prepared we we uh remedied the
tax clearance issue okay sure we will we will call your case in hopefully 15 minutes 20 minutes
thank you okay sure any other continuances
i see no other hats mr chair okay thank you i'm going to start with an add-on
MI 2021-003-765-5319. Chester, this is a request for reconsideration. I vote no to the
reconsideration. Carol Tenere, my vote is no to the reconsideration. Thomas Holloman,
my vote is no to the reconsideration. James Snell, my vote is no to reconsideration.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is no to reconsideration.
my vote is no to reconsideration okay thank you
Okay, thank you.
Case number one, MI 2021-002-648-1001 South Chadwick Street.
Lisa Cohen and Jason Cohen.
Mr. Chair, Mr. Allen Alckmson has his hand raised.
I'm going to speak.
Yes, Jason.
Good morning, Mr. Chair.
Good morning, Mr. Nockleson.
Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter?
Yes, Alan, A-L-A-N, last name Nockleson, N-O-C-H-U-M-S-O-N,
123 South
Lodge Street, Suite 1600,
Philadelphia PA,
19109.
Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth
and nothing but the truth? I do.
You're taking
this case, Mr. Nocklinson? Yes,
I represent the police.
Could you... Okay, I'm sorry,
Chair. May we pause
one minute to allow him to
come in as a panelist? Okay.
just promoted
i'll ask the questions after you won't just one more quick thing
and you'll i'll give it to you carol thank you
morning could could you identify your client and their relationship to the property
Yes, Jason and Lisa Cohen.
They're the owners of the property.
I have Jason Cohen online.
And at the conclusion of my presentation, they will adopt my testimony.
Okay, thank you.
Our Vice Chair of Apparel has a few questions for you.
Good morning, Mr. Notcomson.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed the exhibit packet consisting of proof of ownership tax compliance,
a copy of the refusal or referral photos under plans of the property five days in advance of
this hearing and have you met with the rco and do you have a letter yes in all respects and we
have a letter of support from the coordinating rco south south association thank you you may
proceed and share your screen thank you uh wow all right can everyone see my screen yes all right
so 2001 uh south chadwick street uh i remember and this is a property on the corner of carpenter
and chadwick and graduate hospital area of philadelphia this is currently a single-family
home and all we're looking to do is put a ruby back with the pilot house on top of the property
and i represent individuals who have lived there for some time uh with me you know in my table of
contents is my notice of my current notice of refusal um at the request of the neighborhood
group uh we we sought authorization to reapply uh for a new notice of refusal given the changes
that were requested we're still waiting for that notice refusal it should be delivered to us no
later than we were told uh friday we would ask that i would be able to present this matter and
hold it under advisement for the board to hold it under advisement waiting for that new notice
of refusal uh which would be the subject of a notice decision with the proviso the uh new zoning
permit. We have a letter of support from SOSTA. We have maps of the area, photographs of the
property that surround the area, our plans and drawings, our meeting notice, our application
for appeal, our deeds of property, showing that the Cohens own the property, and with me I have
Jason Cohen, one of the owners, and a certificate of tax credits. Our refusal, which would not be
much different than what you're going to see after the hearing, we're looking to just put a roof
deck on there with a pilot house. And because of the configuration of the stairs, because the
stairs go straight in the middle, our pilot house is configured in a way where we are having a
refusal for the setback of, instead of 10 feet, we have a five-foot setback. What we did to alter
our drawings is we put fencing around the perimeter of our roof deck, and we just want to make sure
that there's no additional refusals as a result of that, but we did add to the HESA neighborhood.
Here's a letter of support. As you can see, it was unanimous support from SOSNA, and then there's
another RCO called North of Washington Avenue Coalition, and they also voted in support of
and they also voted in support of this project for the addition of the roof deck for the pilot house
this project for the addition of the roof deck for the Island House.
maps of the area as as i indicated we're at the corner of chadwood carpenter which is a single
family home not out of character to have uh to have roof decks of this type uh again just a map
from a google perspective photographs of the property existing building structure very handsome
we're just looking to put a roof deck to add a little more flavor we did hire my clients did
hire a contractor to initiate the process. They understood that they were going to get permits
as part of that process. We discovered that they did not get permits, and that's why we're here to
essentially continue that process legally. So you'll see some pictures with a pilot house,
which again, unbeknownst to us, did not have permits, and that's why we're here today.
Chadwick property from Chadwick Street, then South Chadwick Street to the right of the property,
As you can see, across the street are houses with roof decks and pilot houses.
South Chadwick Street to the left of the property, as you can see, there are roof decks and pilot houses as well.
Carpenter Street to the right of the property, as you can see, some of the construction with pilot houses and roof decks.
Carpenter Street to the left of the property.
And then our plans and drawings.
I think this one is the simplest one.
You can see through this illustration of what we're planning to do.
You know, our setback is here.
the five foot but as you can see we and you know and of course we want to we have you know our
clients um have children and you know they live there they have children they wanted this to be
a you know a safe experience for them you know responsibly to enjoy their roof deck so obviously
they agreed to put fencing around there which was not included in the original submission to lni
so as a precautionary matter uh we decided to make a resubmission just to make sure there's
no additional refusals but we put fencing around the perimeter for safety purposes but that's where
a five-foot setback is it's right here beginning with the front entrance of the roof deck but you
can see this is our third floor we really can't change the third floor layout like our staircases
are in the middle and how it's laid out there's no other way for how we configure the pilot
else meeting notice we met with the community um and uh we gave notice of that community meeting
131 addresses are within the affected area these are the addresses proof of mailing
our application for appeal that we coincidentally started the process without counsel because of you
know the torturous nature sometimes of this process they felt it was better you know to
have counsel, you know, complete this process in front of the CPA. So that's why there's
their project information form, their deeds of property. They've lived in the neighborhood
for going on almost five years, so they just want to add some outdoor living for them and their
family. And certificate of tax clearance showing that they're in good standard. I'm going to stop
sharing my screen, I would
ask that Mr. Cohen virtually raise
his hand so he can be
sworn in and adopt more testimony.
Do I speak now?
Could you state your name, Mr. Cohen, and
spell for the court reporter?
Yes, Your Honor. Jason Cohen,
J-A-S-O-N-C-O-H-E-N.
Right. Do you swear
for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth? Yes, sir.
proceed uh yes sorry go ahead yeah mr cohen you heard everything i stated today
yes sir is it true and correct absolutely do you adopt as your own testimony yes sir yes your honor
counsel yes thank you uh mr chair members of the board again we're waiting for the updated refusal
just as a precautionary matter we did it at the request of the community the coordinating rco
we would ask that the board hold this matter under advisement waiting for us to deliver that
updated refusal and then if the board is inclined to grant um our zoning request uh that they grant
it with a proviso uh indicating the zoning permit uh number of the zoning permit application number
for this new refusal okay we're going to hold that um sherman do we need to planning commission
to take a position before we hold it uh yes if we're going to do all we're going to take testimony
we should have planning at the same time all right uh questions from the board no no mr chairman
mr chairman questions from the virtual audience i see no hands mr chair planning commission
Planning Commission. Good morning, Chair Bergman. Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning
good morning chair bergman ian hegarty for the philadelphia city
Commission. That's spelled H-E-G-A-R-T-Y. Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth,
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Yes, sir. Proceed. Thank you. Good morning,
members of the board. Comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing RSA 5
single-family zoning at this location. As we've seen in the drawings, the stairwell of this
structure precludes locating the roof deck access structure um elsewhere according to zoning
requirements city planning commission recommends that the board grant the variance um assuming that
no other refusals are to be issued by lni under the um amended uh plans thank you mr knoxon we
will hold the vote on this thank you very much have a great day all right thank you
am i i'm sorry i'm sorry chair this is tanya yep could we be specific um as far as the vote
we're going to hold the vote once we hear from the l and i permit issues
that mr knockison raised that there's no additional issues okay and do you want to
give it 30 days i would think i would say two weeks all righty thank you kindly chair
MI-2021-004-462-1564 Burke Street.
Mr. Laver.
Excuse me.
Mr. Laver has been promoted to Panama, sir.
Mr. Laver, you've always been sworn.
Good morning, again, Mr. Chairman and members of the board, Adam Laver.
You've already been sworn.
Could you identify your client and the relationship to the property?
Absolutely.
Blank Rome represents 150 West Burke Street, LLC,
which is the equitable owner under an agreement of sale to purchase the property at 150-64 and 166-80 West Burke Street.
150 West Burke Street LLC is an entity associated with Urban Conversions LLC.
Okay. Our Vice Chair has a few questions.
Good morning, Mr. Laver. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Good morning, Madam Vice Chair. Yes, I do.
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, proof of tax compliance, a copy of the
refusal, photos and or plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing and have you met
with the RCO and do you have a letter? Yes the full required information was submitted to the
Zoning Board of Adjustments this past Friday. We met with the coordinating RCO as selected by
council member quinones sanchez and the coordinating rco submitted a letter of unqualified support
this morning to the zoning board thank you so much you may proceed and begin to share your screen
thank you
mr chairman members of the board i i beg your indulgence at the outset
that this hearing will probably be a bit longer due to the issue that was raised at the start
of hearings concerning the council members' concerns, I feel it appropriate and necessary
to establish a full record.
In front of you, and if you need me to enlarge, please just let me know, is a proposed rendering
of the project that I'll describe shortly.
I'd like to note at the outset that Andrew Zakroff,
Z-A-K-R-O-F-F, Andrew Zakroff of Urban Conversions
is with us today, as is Eric Leighton,
L-E-I-G-H-T-O-N of Cecil Baker and Partners Architects.
Urban Conversions has appeared before this board several times.
Some of their past projects are up on the screen before you.
And as the name implies, Urban Conversions prides itself on adaptive creative reuse often of historic properties throughout the city.
However, this case is a little bit different.
In front of you on the screen is a recent photograph of the subject property, and you'll see that it's a vacant parcel, and it's a vacant parcel with a troubled history in the community, just running you through a few photographs to orient.
history in the community just running you through a few photographs to orient you
this last one is off of berg street beyond being a troubled site the proposed redevelopment of the
site has elicited passionate opinions throughout the community which is understandable when one
considers that we're talking about the potential impact the potential transformation of what's
nearly a full city block, an entire city block that's been blighted. Unfortunately, also over the
course of the past eight months of dialogue and discussion, it's become quite evident that it's
impossible to satisfy every individual's oftentimes competing wish lists. Therefore,
Therefore, I think that it's worth pausing before beginning with the specifics of the development proposal to touch upon the very significant community engagement process that has taken place.
The zoning application, Mr. Chairman and members of the board, was filed eight months ago in August of 2021.
Prior to the submission of the formal zoning application, I had reached out to Sloan Foulkes of Councilmember Quinonez Sanchez's office on April 7, 2020, just about two years ago.
And over the course of the past years, I was very appreciative to have periodic communications with Mr. Polk by both email and telephone, so as to keep the council member's office apprised regarding what is a significant development within the 7th Councilmanic District.
And this past summer, pursuant to section 14303.12 B2D of the zoning code, Councilmember Quinones-Sanchez selected South Kensington Community Partners that are known as SKCP as the coordinating RCO.
And pursuant to the council member's designation of SKCP as the coordinating RCO, we engaged with SKCP and the greater community in several meetings.
Five meetings with SKCP took place between September of last year and just last month.
There were meetings on September 1st, 2021, September 22nd, 2021, October 6th, 2021, March 2nd of this year, and March 23rd of this year.
And not surprisingly, between these meetings, there was discussion as well with members of the zoning committee of the community, et cetera.
Additionally, this development proposal was subject, due to its size, to public civic design review hearing, and that was completed on March 1st, and representatives of the coordinating RCO and the council member's office attended.
This was a very engaged process, and during the course of the process, the development plans were refined.
On the screen before you, you can see a letter from Ms. Sunkit authorizing us to amend the application, which we have done, and that amendment was in line with the discussion with stakeholders in the community.
And as noted in the letter, which was attached to Ms. Sunkit's approval, we noted that we were looking to create a significant setback from the south edge of the property to adjust the overall height downward, to reduce the FAR, and to eliminate bays and balconies at the lower levels, again, in response to community concerns.
concerns this led to a community benefits agreement that was reached with the coordinating rco which
supports the project and we were taken aback unfortunately just yesterday to learn of council
member quinones sanchez's concerns regarding the development proposal however i'd like to
state for the record that there's no deadline on open communications and continued dialogue
We are committed to meeting with the council member outside of this forum, and I will be in touch with Mr. Fulks after the hearing today to move that process forward.
Turning to the subject of the proposal before you, and you see on the screen some historic photographs of the property.
These date to March and April of 2019.
I'm bringing up historic photographs because I'd like to point out this large structure that I'm trying to indicate with the...
to point out this large structure that I'm trying to indicate with the hand cursor
is the site of a former factory that existed on this parcel and I'll show you some
other photographs here and here is a good one. This does not exist anymore as I'll show you in a
moment, but this is what had existed for a long time. The property was previously home to what
was known as the Peter Wall, W-O-L-L and Sons Manufacturing Company Complex. In April of 2019,
however, this industrial building that had existed at the site for a good 100 years or so
was demolished by other parties once again we are the equitable owner we don't own the property
and here on the screen before you are the photos taken after the site was cleared previously and
you can see just the gaping hole in the community that uh that uh occurred once this happened
i should also note that numerous prior attempts to redevelop the site have failed by other parties
leading to today. Photographs on the screen right now show current photographs, giving you a sense
of the surrounding residential nature of the community. The neighborhood's industrial past
has largely shifted, residential living has expanded, and the subject property,
the vacant land where the arrows are pointing has clearly been significantly underutilized.
Turning to these aerial photographs with the subject property with the red dots around it,
red lines around it, this shows you the vacant approximately 32,000 square foot parcel.
It fronts on Burks, where the hand icon is, running along Masher and Hancock on the left of the screen, if you will, with the rear of the property backing up to parcels that front on Wilts Street over here.
Here are some additional photographs of this site.
I'm bringing up some conceptual renderings now of what we are proposing.
Urban Conversions has proposed a new residential and commercial building designed by the highly
respected Philadelphia architectural firm Cecil Baker and Partners.
And this proposal includes 152 residential dwelling units, ground floor retail commercial,
which you can see here along the Burke Street facade, 42 off-street automobile parking spaces
accessed solely along Mashor Street, 77 indoor bicycle parking spaces, and one off-street loading
space also located along Mashor Street. There are four curb cuts currently at the property.
we are reducing that, as I mentioned, with just the curb cuts along Masher Street.
And you're seeing on the screen renderings of the site from various angles,
which I'll bring up again as we go into some additional specifics later on.
Here is the residential entry along Burke Street, just so you can see that.
The proposed reuse of this former industrial site where prior projects have failed is clearly
a tremendous opportunity.
Before we address the notice of refusal, I'd like to pull up this zoning map showing the
underlying zoning with the arrow pointing to the large site that you're now familiar
The zoning map, Mr. Chairman, shows our property as ICMX, but it also shows around it the predominance of IRMX, RM1 in the orange, dottings of CMX2, and other residential zoning districts in the nearby vicinity.
And you'll note that the parcel really is not in line zoning-wise with the surrounding districts.
The development proposal before you has been designed to meet the IRMX zoning district
standards, which we would submit are more appropriate in light of the
which we would submit are more appropriate in light of the growth and the development of the
community. And I'd further note for the record that, in fact, in 2021, the City of Philadelphia
changed the zoning of similar parcels on the north side of Burke Street, for example, to IRMX.
Here is the refusal, however, in front of you. It's a two-page refusal. I'd like to note that
this was amended to again to take into consideration the adjustments that were made based on dialogue
with the community. There are three refusals. I'm going to go into detail, forgive me, on each of
them because this is the heart obviously of the board's review. I've highlighted just for the
board's ease and convenience each of the refusals. Number one, residential living is strictly
prohibited in this ICMX industrial district. That means residential of any type. The only,
the closest to residential would be a caretaker's residence, which really was historically
associated with industrial, to have somebody on site, God forbid, to make sure there wasn't an
explosion or something like that so i'd like to speak regarding this residential prohibition
the property itself is located directly across the street i'm going to scroll down for a moment
to go back to the zoning map uh directly across the street from this green area which is an
sppo parks and open space special purpose district let me show you a photograph of it
It's a recreation center, a city recreation center, which is appropriate for the surrounding residential and shows the residential oriented nature of the location, rather than having heavy in and out traffic usage from an industrial site, the types of smells and other health risks associated with the industrial, which once was appropriate in the community.
Also, I'm pulling up a transit map to show you that we are within yards of the L, SEPTA's
elevated line, as well as several SEPTA bus lines that you can see on this map, and this
transitional site calls for mixed-use development.
The transitioning nature of Burke Street and its proximity to other residential development
would render industrial use on the site unfeasible.
Turning back, if I may, to the refusal,
number two is that the ICMX Industrial District
anticipates industrial loading and unloading,
calling for a very intense, heavy, sick spaces for loading.
During the eight months of discussion with the community,
I don't recall a single comment raised in support of continued industrial at the site.
The proposed plans appropriately show one off-street loading space.
Again, that was off of Masher Street, you may recall.
And that would adequately support the planned residential and commercial uses that are proposed.
The third and final refusal, as you'll see here highlighted, is maximum height, 60 feet.
and this is a really nuanced issue. Applicants' amended application proposes a height of 68 and
a half feet to the top of the sixth story of the seven-story building. The seventh story itself
is heavily set back uh that seven partial seven story goes to 79 feet nine and three quarter
inches uh bear with me for just a moment to to pull down to some exhibits that will help with
this here we are so where the hand cursor is you can see the 79 nine and three quarters
which takes us to the very top of the setback seven story and you can see that 68
in this instance it is actually three quarter inches I had said half pardon pardon that
but that takes you to the top of the sixth story right here incidentally and I'll discuss this
later across the street, you see much higher elevations for some of the existing former
former industrial properties that have been at this site for quite a while. Also here is another
industrial properties that have been at this site for
elevation that shows you the same numbers that I had mentioned again to the top of the six story
68 feet six and three quarter inches and then the partial seventh story takes you to that 79 number.
I'm pulling up on the screen some professional reports that have been presented in the material
shared with the board last week. The reports show unfavorable geotechnical and environmental
conditions that preclude below-grade development at the site, which is relevant when we're talking
about a height variance. This makes smaller scale proposals unfeasible and vertical development I
would submit appropriate. Here is Earth Engineering Incorporated Geotechnical Engineers and Geologists
report which states that shallow groundwater is present at the site. It further states lowering
the groundwater elevation can also impact adjacent buildings by potentially causing
settlement of adjacent existing building and structure foundations. These are quotes that I've
highlighted. Earth Engineering's report concludes, quote, it is EEI's opinion that for this site in
particular, based on the presence of shallow groundwater and due to the potential high costs
uncommon within the industry for similar projects and ongoing operational issues associated with
below-grade space development, below-grade parking should be avoided, and any below-grade
space minimized as much as possible, end quote. Moving to the Environmental Consultants Report,
Advantage Environmental Consultants Report states that environmental remediation is being conducted
at the site, not surprisingly, members of the board, due to the heavy industrial that had once
been there. There is semi-volatile organic compound contamination in the soils, and the
environmental consultants call for capping that contamination to prevent exposure to soil
contamination at the site and for members of the community. Quote, additional subsurface
disturbance from a remedial standpoint would not be recommended, end quote. And finally, Cecil Baker
and Partners Architects report buttresses these findings based on the site constraints.
Urban Conversions has proposed, I'm still speaking towards the height variance, of course,
Urban Conversions has proposed high ceiling, light-filled commercial spaces along Burke Street,
as shown in this rendering in line with community interests. There are also large formal former
industrial buildings on the north side of Burke Street here is one across the street for example
that are of a similar size and scale to the proposal actually in excess of the scale.
And here is a very interesting rendering in the upper left hand corner it shows a previous
iteration shared with the community, and the revised rendering, and I'll point out some of
the changes. Urban conversions has decreased the proposed height and increased the setbacks at
the seventh floor that you can see where the hand icon is. This was done in response to community
feedback. The massing of the proposed new construction structure includes sizable setbacks
to respect the pedestrian-level experience, particularly along Wilt Street, W-I-T Street,
which is the lower right-hand corner, I'd like to share a sight line with you from Wilt Street.
So from Wilt Street, a pedestrian standing right outside his or her home or walking by
would not even be able to see or appreciate that setback partial 7th story.
And their line of sight where I'm trying to put the hand icon falls even below the top of the 6th story.
So much closer actually to the code 60 foot height limitation.
Going back here to the massing, you can see a 90-foot, 1-inch setback from the Wilt Street property lines to the interior courtyard, and a 51-foot, 3-inch setback.
to the interior courtyard and a 51 foot three inches setback up at the seventh partial seven
story level between those properties which is a huge change and just imagine on the site the
former factory building which was right along the property line actually not set back at all
so the permissible uses light industrial along with limited commercial are quite
limited at the location, as demonstrated by the vacant eyesore that currently exists in
the midst of a lively transit-oriented neighborhood. And continued industrial use at the location
is not practicable. The glance at the zoning map, the aerial photographs show solid residential
with some mixed commercial and a sampling of both old and newer construction. Common sense would
dictate that the proposed multifamily residential is most consistent with the surrounding character
of the community. And the steadfast adherence to what is now an obsolete zoning classification
for this location, being the ICMX zoning designation, is not in the best interest of
of the city plan or the community.
Cecil Baker and Partners on behalf of Urban Conversions
has proposed, albeit at great expense,
a first-class re-imagining of this block,
which should be exciting in any neighborhood in the city,
deserving of Rittenhouse Square, Chestnut Hill,
and South Kensington as well.
I mentioned that the Civic Design Review Committee reviewed this project, and I'm just pulling up their letter for the record.
They described the design as, quote, lovely, end quote, commended the materials, facade articulation, and demonstration sizes and patterns.
Unlike many other projects, CDR praised the proposed, quote, use of tree trenches and planters to create vegetation on both sides of the walking zone, end quote.
That means not only along the gutter, if you will, where the cars are, but also adjacent to the property.
So when you're walking along the sidewalk, you have greenery on both sides, quote, leading to a wonderful sidewalk environment, end quote.
The project's parking lot was also commended for the insertion of trees within the parking area.
Moving to the coordinating RCO, South Kensington Community Partners, they issued a letter of support, noting the many meetings regarding the site going back several years, and noting several attributes associated with the proposed development.
Quote, active uses that serve the neighborhood on Burke Street being appropriate and appreciated, end quote.
Quote, the Burke Street L stop is just a couple blocks away, making this a prime location for transit-oriented development, end quote.
Additionally, the agreement with SKCP reflects the developer's investment in the community through a coordinating RCO program fully within the coordinating RCO to keep low and moderate income neighbors in their homes, specifically low and moderate income neighbors in their homes.
even in the midst of a pandemic and social distancing
I'm bringing up for you a petition of support from some two dozen plus neighbors who had the
opportunity to review the proposed plans and independently offered their support for the
project. On this last page, for example, several neighbors on the same block of Hancock Street where
the project is being proposed. Turning, if I may, to the floor plans, and I'm trying to get through
this quickly at this point, again, I beg your pardon. Here is the ground floor consisting of
the residential lobby entrance on Burke Street near Hancock Street. Retail along Burke Street,
it's about 7,300 square feet of retail, shown as four different spaces, but that could be changed
based on the needs and the interest. The indoor trash storage to serve both the commercial and
the residential, just adjacent to the single off-street interior loading, which is enclosed
and off of Masher Street, and you'll see the parking access off of Masher, as previously
described. Once again, eliminating four curb cuts for this much more efficient use, which
use, which has been reviewed by the streets department. Please also take notice of the heavily
has been reviewed by the Streets Department. Please also take note of the
landscaped and buffered area behind the Wilt Street properties in the courtyard of the proposed
development. This speaks to Cecil Baker and partners considering not only the interests of
those future residents of this site, but the neighboring properties and what their experience
will be. And the neighboring pedestrians walking to and from the L and to and from
the lively retail commercial along the site. In addition, I'll point this out later, in blue on
the left along Hancock Street, there are two town homes built into the project with Philadelphia
style stoops to go in and out of those homes and have the feel of the more low-scale residential,
the mix that is in the neighborhood.
Here is an elevation along Masher Street. You can hardly perceive the loading zone and the in-and-out
parking along master street the green walls the screening trying to really keep the scale
pedestrian friendly and here is that uh hancock street elevation it's a little difficult to see
but these are the two stoops to those townhomes that i had mentioned the basement itself as
previously discussed due to the site constraints is very very tight uh it's a waterproof utilities
of all. Nothing more can go there. The second and third floors have been adjusted in the upper
right-hand corner as the previous iteration and the large scale to the left is the current.
The current iteration eliminates balconies and bays to give more privacy to nearby existing
neighbors. That's the second floor. The third floor is similar. Fourth through sixth floors are
typical layouts. And here is the setback partial seventh floor revised to allow for an east wing
setback. The green area shows you had heavy setback and there are the numbers in terms of
the setbacks that I had discussed before. I'd also like to just quickly show you the proposed
plantings both inside and along the sidewalks. You can see what I had mentioned with street trees and
also greenery right up against the building on all sides. There's no back of house here.
The proposed unit mix itself is 44 studios, 76 one bedroom, one bathroom units, 32 two bedroom,
two or two and a half bathroom units. And in this instance, the authorization of variance relief
will not alter the character of the neighborhood or district or be detrimental to the public
welfare. The proposal fits into the surrounding neighborhood as evidenced by the coordinating
RCO support in addition to other expressions of support submitted, speaking to the granting of
relief being of benefit to the public and within the spirit of the code. The proposed variance
would represent the minimum variance to afford relief and represent the least modification
possible of the outmoded ICMX regulations as they relate to this site. The grant of variance relief
will not substantially increase congestion in the public streets, increase danger of fire,
or otherwise endanger the public health safety or general welfare. Based on the present conditions,
which have been a source of great contention for those who have to live with the current property
that we do not own, the proposed development will be a tremendous improvement.
Cecil Baker and Partners, the architects, the visionaries behind this project,
represent the highest and best use for the site in line with the finest locations in the city.
Here's a sampling of some of their other recent work.
The proposed development appropriately respects a changing neighborhood with a mix of long
existing uses and new projects dotting the neighborhood this is reflected in the red
overlays which show the recent development projects and then you can see
classic philadelphia structures that have been in the community for a long time
the project will not adversely affect transportation or unduly burden water sewer
school park or other public facilities there are no environmental issues we are very proud of this
There are no environmental issues.
We are very proud of this project.
pride.
Mr. Zakroff is here at the appropriate time
to adopt and affirm testimony.
Mr. Layton of Cecil Baker and Partners is present
if the board has any specific questions.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the board.
Why don't we have the principal come on
and we'll adopt your testimony.
Mr. Zakroff, would you kindly raise your virtual hand so that you may be sworn in by Chairman Bergman?
Andrew Zakroff.
Good morning.
Good morning.
Could you state your name and spell it for the court reporter?
Andrew Zakroff.
Z-A-K-R-O-F-F.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
Thank you, Mr. Zakroff.
have you been present for the entire uh pendency of this presentation yes were you able to clearly
hear uh the testimony that i offered yes were you able to clearly see the exhibits that were
submitted yes and would you adopt and affirm the testimony that i've offered as your own sir
yes i do thank you questions from the board no mr chairman no mr chairman
no mr chairman questions or comments from the virtual audience
mr chair i have a mr mark with his hand raised i will allow him to speak at this time
hello could you could you state your name and spell for the court reporter please
Yes, the name is Mark, last name Prazak, P like Paul, R-A-Z like zebra, A-K.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
Thank you. Yes, I'm a near neighbor of this project.
I live three blocks north of this on Hancock Street.
I've lived there for almost 10 years.
This parcel should have obviously been IRMX or CMX3.
um i don't know why the history of that i don't know why it is what it is but i'm sure there's
some political reasoning behind that um so they should have never had to go through this process
um and second of all this is a one minute walk to burke station one minute walk not to mention
the bus lines um to me the fact that the setback was reduced and height reduced which reduces the
number of apartments is a big loss and unfortunately the rco thinks that somehow this is a victory which
is something I don't understand. I think the project is a beautiful project. It's going to
add lots of density to a severely depopulated area over the last 50 years, the legacy of
deindustrialization. I do have a couple of problems, though. It really should have been
three times as tall. This building should have been 200 feet. There shouldn't be any parking
included in this project. And I think that the city is going to end up regretting this regressive
attitude that it has towards height and density in places virtually adjacent to mass transit in
terms of affordability and in terms of climate change and the future needs of conglomerating
as a city should be. And unfortunately, our zoning process and code requires this consensus
model, which allows the loudest and most reductionist voices to curtail projects of
this scope and beauty. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you for calling in. Any other
comments or questions from the virtual audience? Sir, I have Mr. Sloan Foulkes on the line.
I will now speak at this time. Sure. Hi, Mr. Foulkes, just state your name. You've already
been sworn. Yes. Good morning again, Chairman Bergman and ZBA. Sloan Foulkes, Councilman
sanchez uh office 508 city hall um just simply just uh just i would our officers simply like to
be made aware of the uh date for the um for the uh the vote uh so that we can submit a written uh
opinion prior to that uh after after our meeting with both the uh applicants and the rco thank you
thank you any other comments or from the virtual audience
Sir, I have Ms. Eileen DiVringhi with her hand raised. I have allowed her to speak.
Could you state your name as spelled for the court reporter?
Hi, can you hear me?
I can.
Great. So Eileen DiVringhi, E-I-L-E-E-N. Last name DiVringhi, D-I-V as in Victor, R-I-N-G as in George, I.
um and i'm here sorry okay do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but
Okay, do you swear for him to tell the truth to hold?
the truth i do proceed uh so i'm here representing the south kinson community partners rco um and i
just wanted to provide a little bit of additional context on the community process around this
project and sort of highlight um sort of where we ended up um so um as adam highlighted in his
very comprehensive presentation um there were some things that neighbors um really liked
immediately um about the project um so again acknowledging that it is in the transit um it is
appropriate location for kind of this transit oriented development um we of course like seeing
the commercial on the first floor to add to kind of economic life in the neighborhood excuse me
mr chair i apologize for the interruption this is the court reporter yeah could i please ask the
witness to slow down just a bit sure sure sure sorry just go a little bit go eileen just go a
bit slower so the court reporter can get us down. Absolutely. So the two major concerns that
community members had raised were around sort of this height and density question. So this is
taller than a lot of these kinds of multifamily structures that we typically see proposed in
the neighborhood. A lot of them are around 60 feet. Eileen, give me a favor. You seem to be
like backing off the mic. So go slower and try to stay close to the mic when you speak, please.
okay sorry is this any better it is that is okay great um so the major concerns that neighbors had
raised were around kind of height and density um and in projects of the size we typically like to
see um on-site inclusion of a certain percentage of units to be set aside um for affordability
So, as you heard in Adam's presentation, the team made some modifications to the project
to address, particularly for Wilt Street neighbors, and Wilt Street is a street with, you know,
two-story host row homes that have been there for a very long time.
And they did try to address some of the height issues there.
I don't think it completely ameliorated the concerns of neighbors on that block, but they
did make some accommodations there. And then on the affordability side, I wanted to provide a
little bit more context on the community benefits agreement that we worked out with the project
team. So they indicated from the start that they were not interested in having on-site kind of set
asides for affordable units. So we tried to identify and be creative about other opportunities
to accomplish kind of the same goals as including affordable units on site, and we saw that
as, you know, identifying housing-related intervention that would help preserve sort
of the economic diversity of the neighborhood.
And one way to do that is to provide financial assistance to low-income homeowners who are
existing neighbors of this project and provide assistance for them to make, you know, critical
home repairs that they maybe would not be able to otherwise afford to address weatherization issues
to help keep their utility bills manageable to make adaptive modifications to their homes
so they can comfortably age in place and then other sorts of things like resolving tangled
title issues right which are really important to being able to access other kinds of
housing supports that are available through the city so the set aside fund is dedicated to those
purposes. It is not something that is going to add any organizational budget. All of the people
on the RCO are volunteers. None of us are going to see any of that money. So I just wanted to
clear up any sort of misconceptions about what the payment value might represent.
And this community benefits agreement was detailed at our last meeting, our last public
community meeting with the developer to the community so they could have a comprehensive
of sense of what sort of the the benefits and drawbacks of this particular proposal are
and our process is always that our stance is determined by a vote of neighbors who live within
a certain radius um so it was entirely within neighbors purview to say you know that's that's
nice but we still oppose the project but ultimately when neighbors sort of weighed the pros and cons
we had a vote that was in favor of supporting the project as presented today um and i will
add Mr. Folks from the councilwoman's office was in attendance at this meeting where we provided
sort of the broad strokes of the agreement so I regret that we weren't able to get the MOU to
the councilwoman sooner so that we could have allayed any sort of concern she might have but
hopefully it wasn't um it wasn't I mean you're starting to you're starting to go a little quicker
and fade away again so I mean put it you're you you support the program yes we supported the
yes we supported the project okay thank you thank you does anyone else have any comments about the
project. Okay, thank you. Thank you.
project i see no further answer mr chair planning commission thank you chairman bergman ian hegarty
for the philadelphia city planning commission uh members of the board uh start out i just have to
note that the comments of the cdr committee are not an expression of the city planning commission's
recommendation or opinion regarding this zoning variance. And I also just wanted to further note
that the proposed benefits arrangement is not enforceable by the city and is duplicative of
existing city-run programs and is therefore not a factor in the commission's recommendation.
That said, in 2016, the zoning map was amended on this site from I2 to ICMX. And this was done
in order to recognize what was then an operating business, which we've seen in this presentation
has since been vacated and cleared from the site.
The shallow groundwater conditions cited by the applicant support a hardship claim for
building height and for parking.
We do not believe that there are unique physical conditions of the lot supporting the hardship
claim for residential use variants.
However, given the surrounding context and given that the proposed uses are consistent
with general recommendations from the comprehensive plan to encourage transit supportive development
and active ground floor uses, the City Planning Commission ultimately recommends that the board
grant this variance. Thank you. So what we're going to do is we're going to hold the vote on this,
and Mr. Folks talked about a date. I'm looking for Tanya at least a month so that they can
see if they can't have their meetings and see where we stand with this. So we will vote on
this in a month and tanya to have an idea what a date that would be pardon pardon the interruption
if i may i would respectfully request that it be uh if at all possible no more than one month uh i
i know i i but just so you know i gave it a month because in your presentation you said time
was is not a problem with doing working this out i i i i mean okay so what we'll do is
you know be done by in one month and must be heard must be heard thank you
tanya are we okay with that um so are we stating we're going to do feedback or a letter
from the councilwoman's office that would depend on where we place it yeah i would think
a letter would be fine okay well how about may 4th that's fine with me yep
Thank you everyone. Thank you Mr. Chairman and members of the Board. I appreciate your
indulgence this morning. Okay. MI 2021 004971 1925 North 19th. Is Mr. DeMarco back?
um yes sir he has been promoted to panelists okay thank you good
good morning mr chairman marco you've already been sworn
could you identify your client and the relationship to the property yes i can it's shalom
atias is the owner okay i represent and our vice chair has a few questions sure hi mr demarco do
Do you agree to weigh the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, it's a referral, and I agree to stipulate.
Thank you.
Okay, sorry about that.
No, that's all right.
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership tax compliance, a copy of the referral, photos, and or plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing?
And have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
Yes, I did.
And we have a letter that was received on Monday and sent directly to the Board of non-opposition.
Great.
you may proceed and share your screen thank you so much thank you and thank you for your indulgence
this morning everyone um so the uh this is a special exception matter for a single room
residence this board uh heard the case um back in 2018 and agreed to a temporary three-year
special exception uh we are back uh to ask that it be made uh permanent um you can see here and
And we agreed to the original provisors that the board had established, which is the key
were no basement no basement bedrooms and we had we do have trash disposals
the other one is not on here we had we do have trash disposals in the second and third floor
um i guess the other proviso was the was the temporary but we do ask that it be made permanent
anyway mr chairman uh we did meet with the rco there was no opposition the property is unusual
in that it was constructed as a duplex with four bedrooms each and that renders um it difficult uh
to do since no more than three unrelateds may live together.
There were struggles to get that situation resolved,
and that's why the applicant went forward back in 2018
for a special reception for a single-room residence.
By the way, these are seniors, 50 and over.
It's run by the owner himself.
I'll put him on in a minute.
The seniors loved living there.
and there are no drug and alcohol rehab, there's no mental health treatment, there's no halfway
house. This is strictly individuals, very affordable units, senior, over 50 living.
I'll show you some photos. Like I said, we agree no units in the basement. There's a large rear
yard with full access by all residents for trash storage and this is the property you can see
there we go uh there are vacant lots on either side the block is challenging um that's the
posting of the property it's kind of unusual i'll rotate this lot like i said lots of vacant lots
So you see, there's no development on either side.
Anyway, we met with Judith Robinson, who is the local RCO.
She acknowledged it's well run.
And there we go.
All right.
And Shalom is here to adopt my testimony.
There's nothing on you.
We meet the standard for, oh, by the way, there was.
an incident it's fully sprinklered there was an incident with an incident with the sprinkler
system it flooded the units so he had to move out the residents to do full um full rehab of
the property but it's really nice on the inside I'll show you some before and after photos
we can wrap up quickly um like I said the residents are very happy but anyway this is
what's going on now there was extreme water damage and while I'm going through the rest of my
photos i'll ask shalom shalom if you can do the raise hand function now um
oh the other proviso was maximum 10 residents and we're fine with that maximum of 10 residents
and here's the old permit from the original case uh we're fine with those two provisors if that
and judith did not ask for that but uh we're okay if that if the board needs to continue that we're
fine with that as well. There's nothing unusual about this use that makes it more adverse
than other rooming houses. As a matter of fact, I would argue it's less impactful than
other single family, single room residences in that there is no mental health, no drug
and alcohol rehab. It's strictly senior living. So let me go ahead and ask Shalom. Shalom,
can you raise your virtual hand on the Zoom app? Shalom Atiyaz.
Could you state your name, please?
Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter?
Hi, my name is Shalom Atias, S-H-A-L-O-M-A-T-I-A-S.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Absolutely, yes.
Shalom, did you hear all my factual statements and testimony, and is it true and accurate,
and do you adopt those statements as your own testimony in this case?
absolutely yes sir all right mr chairman that's all i have thank you questions from questions
from the board no mr chairman no mr chairman question from the virtual audience no mr chairman
i see no further answer mr chair planning commission thank you chairman bergen ian
hegarty for the philadelphia city planning commission uh board members this proposed
uh board members this proposed use is permitted by special exception at this location uh we don't
use is permitted by special exception at this location.
believe that this use will cause any detrimental impacts to the neighborhood beyond what might
normally be expected and so the city planning commission recommends that the board grant the
special exception thank you mi 2021 004971 1925 north 19th street i vote yes with provisos no more
than 10 residents, no basement living. Carol Tenere, my vote is yes with provisos. Thomas
Howell, my vote is yes with provisos. James Snell, yes with provisos. Ishmael Shahid, yes with
provisos. Thank you. Thank you for your indulgence today. Have a good afternoon, everyone. You too.
MI-2021-003-027-2121 Dickerson Street.
Neely Bryant.
Sorry, Mr. John Taylor has his hand raised.
Mr. Taylor, you've already been sworn.
Just state your name, please.
i'm mr taylor
good morning my name is john taylor i'm counsel for the applicant um brian neely
i've been sworn in i think you were already sworn in this morning right correct right okay um
is he the owner of the property he is the owner of the property and he's present during the
hearing as well great our vice chair has a few questions for you um good morning have you emailed
the exhibit packet with proof of ownership tax compliance a copy of the refusal or referral
photos and or plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing and have you met with the
RCO and do you have a letter? We've met with the RCO. We do have a letter. Five days before the ZBA
hearing, we submitted a packet with all the documents you mentioned except the tax cert
because we did not have it. We got the tax cert yesterday and we submitted the tax cert yesterday.
okay and sir what is your name sir john taylor i'm the attorney for the applicant
okay do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy
i do thank you so much you may proceed and share your screen thank you thank you
Okay, is the ZBA able to see the shared screen?
This is our presentation for 2121 Dickinson Street, Philadelphia, PA.
Attached to our presentation are the refusal, the application for appeal, the RCO letter
of support with proviso, the deed proving ownership, photographs, and plans.
Not included is the tax cert because that was not available on Friday, but I can show
that during the presentation because it was obtained yesterday.
This is Exhibit A. It is the refusal. The property, 2121 Dickinson Street, Philadelphia, PA, is located in a CMX2. Presently, the property is a vacant lot. My client would like to build a new construction on the site.
It would be a three-story attached structure, not to exceed 38 feet, with cellar, roof deck, and also a two-family household living.
This request was refused because it is in a CMX2 district, whereby the first floor must be used for commercial purposes.
There's also the rear yard depth.
We're proposing a seven-feet rear yard, and it's supposed to be nine feet.
and the required open space is 231 square feet and we're requesting 140 square feet this is a undue hardship
feet and we're requesting 140 square feet this is a undue hardship for reasons to be explained in
the presentation exhibit B will show the application as I said right now the present
use of the property is a vacant lot it is a blight it is not good for the community the
vacant lot is bad it doesn't generate any tax dollars it is not good this proposed use is
much better, it does not increase congestion, and it actually recognizes it by being a solely
residential, it recognizes the shifting character of the neighborhood from a less commercial
to more residential neighborhood.
We met with the RCO, the Point Breeze Community Development Coalition, they have offered
a letter of support.
The position of the RCO was 5 support, 0 oppose.
The position of the community was 6 support, 1 oppose.
The proviso contained in the letter is initial rent will be $1,000 for each apartment.
and out of order is the plans which is also attached here to is exhibit f
it shows the plans of the building it does not exceed 38 feet it is a residential unit multi
and here is the rear yard obviously we would like the
first floor unit to be slightly bigger to off more living accommodations
This is the deed.
It proves that my client, Brian M. Neely, owns the property.
This is a photograph of the neighborhood.
This fence is actually where the property would be built.
This is a newer construction.
The property proposed would be substantially similar to the newer construction.
as a coincidence my client mr neely also operates the storefront here he has operated the storefront
here for many years this shows the vacant lot at a different angle noticing across the street
there's a laundromat there's also another store this store is actually the story that's operated
by mr neely so that really shows there's already a saturation of commercial storefronts in the
neighborhood and as the neighborhood has shifted to more residential is
appropriate that this structure be wholly residential this is a picture of
the vacant lot has a very nice natural setting to it however it would be better
if it would be a construction you know a building a structure residential
structure clearly there's adequate space if you look here I'm circling a little
mailboxes here conforms with the existing neighborhood now these are
copies of the postings there was two zoning posters put out the first hearing
was May 8th or May 6th it was continued because the tax compliance issue which
wasn't really resolved until yesterday these are the second postings and
finally these are the print these are the building plans which were already shown previously
if i may like to show the um let's see if i'm able to
so this is what we submitted yesterday the tax compliance
at this point if i may i'd like to introduce the testimony of mr brian neely the owner of the
property can you hear mr neely can you please raise your hand the chat line
Mr. Neely, state your name, please.
I'm allowed to speak.
Would you state your name and spell it for the court reporter?
Hello, everyone.
My name is Brian Neely, spelled B-R-Y-A-N.
Neely, N as in neighbor, double E-L-Y.
Right.
do you swear a firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes i do proceed mr neely are you the owner of the property yes sir okay have you applied for
okay have you applied for this variance yes i have and have you heard my the entire hearing
this variance yes i have and have you heard
regarding this matter i did have you seen all the exhibits that were shared with the zba
yes uh do you adopt or confirm my uh presentation or testimony to the zba today as your own yes
thank you no further questions questions from the board no mr chairman
and mr chairman questions or comments from the virtual audience
i see no further hands mr chair planning commission
thank you chair bergman ian hegarty for the philadelphia city planning commission
members of the board the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing commercial
mixed use zoning on this site first with regard to the dimensional variances the applicant has
not shown that strict adherence to the zoning rules would cause a financial detriment which
is one of the required findings for a dimensional variance hardship. With regard to the use variance,
the applicant's hardship claim is also not supported with the required evidence, which is
for a unique physical condition or circumstance. The vacant condition of the lot is, of course,
not a unique physical condition leading to hardship. We'd also want to point out that
the adjacent property has been developed with ground floor commercial use, and the intention
of this use requirement is to support communities with equitable access to goods and services.
We further note that the proviso is not enforceable and should not be included in the board's
decision. If the applicant wishes to reapply and make use of the mixed income housing bonus,
an additional unit might be allowed as a matter of right in exchange for actually providing
a deed restricted affordable unit. But in this case, we recommend that the board deny all these
variances. MI 2021-003-027-2121 Dickinson Street. I vote no.
Harold Tenere, my vote is no. Thomas Holloman, my vote is no. James Snell, my vote is no.
Thank you. MI 2021-004-905-2503, Sharswood Street, Joseph Consul.
Mr. Consul has been promoted to panelist.
Mr. Consul, state your name, please.
You've already been sworn to state your name.
It is Joseph Consul.
Could you identify your client and the relationship to the property?
Yes, my client is Tamar Smith.
She is the owner of 2503 Shardswood Street.
Our vice chair has a few questions.
Hi, Mr. Consul.
do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy have you emailed
the exhibit packet with proof of ownership tax compliance a copy of the refusal photos under
plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing and have you met with the rco and
do you have a letter uh yes everything okay great you may proceed and please share your screen
just uh one like little mini point is my screen up uh yeah i don't know what this
sort of you sort of got like a shopping list though oh yeah sorry that's my it's okay that's
my shopping list okay so this is what i wanted i'd like to add something to that list but go ahead
do you need do you need bread flour uh because i do so did that work yes all right perfect um
So the refusal itself is correct. On the Zoning Appeals website, it seems to state the refusal is for a two-unit building, which we're not asking for density here.
So I don't know if that's something to put on the record. I've never had that experience before, where ATLAS lists what the appeal is as something different than what the refusal says.
But I just wanted to touch on that.
I'm sorry. May I interject a thought, Chairman?
Go ahead.
Mr. Consul, what does your poster say?
Does the poster match your refusal?
The poster matches the refusal, yes.
So then everything should be good, sir.
All right, great.
Thanks.
So we've solved my shopping list.
Now let's talk about 2503 Shardswood.
2503 Shardswood Street is 25th and Shardswood, which is in Brewery Town.
The owner of the property, as I stated, is Tamara Smith. She is on this call. She runs Layla's Way Behavioral Services, which is the website that I have on the screen right now.
The owner of the property, as I stated, is Tamara Smith.
She is on this call.
Layla's Way is a leading company which provides therapeutic support services to children with autism and other behavioral health diagnoses in the city of Philadelphia.
They are partnered with Community Behavioral Health of the City of Philadelphia to provide these services to local children.
CBH and Layla's Way have determined that in order to better serve the city, it was necessary to start to work to prevent busing these children with these needs out of the city to the surrounding counties, because that's where a lot of these single-room residences are.
As Ms. Smith can explain, and I'll ask her to briefly, that way of operating has been problematic in the sense that it removes children from the communities they live in.
And after treatment, those same children return to the communities feeling a bit like outsiders.
So the hope of CBH is that companies like Tamar's, with long and positive reputations, would institute local properties to keep kids within their own communities while they receive treatment.
This also allows the parents of those children to actually visit the kids because oftentimes when the kids get sent to the counties for this kind of treatment, the parents have to figure out how to get transportation because they need to actually drive out to see them.
That oftentimes is not possible.
So that's the background on the company and what it does.
uh onto the property itself it's 2503 shardswood street it's a 750 736 square foot property
i'll show you the outside of it um it is in the early stages of rehabilitation there it is right
there uh aerial photo another photo from the front it's a shot of the street
okay uh it is going to be rehabilitated per the plans on the screen into a two-bedroom
two-story home um the reason we are here is because miss smith is seeking to use the property
as what is called a single room residence i call it that refusal a single room residence is a zoning
designation that allows for unrelated children to live together and to receive care originally per
our refusal, the maximum number of children living in the property at any one time would
have been four. That was a number that was supported by the guidelines of the Commonwealth
of Pennsylvania for the amount of space available for the care of the children.
However, we presented our original plans to the Brewery Town Sharswood Community Civic
association on january 20th uh as their very thorough uh letter explains at that time there
was concern regarding the uh number of kids in the property they thought that four at any given time
was too many uh so on february 17th we returned to the rco and prevented revised plans lowering
the number of children housed to three so it would be three children and then um there's always a
staff member on site uh 24 hours a day that that that cares for them and uh treats them uh per um
what lay what layla's way does um so at that time we returned to the rco on february 17th
and we got a 30 uh 30 to zero vote in support of our variants um so we believe that the applicant
has demonstrated that there is a need for her services specifically in the city uh as well as
getting strong support from the community, both for the kind of work she's doing and how she
seeks to do it in this specific property. And because of that, we ask that the board
grant this variance. I'd like to call Ms. Tamar Smith quickly to just briefly tell us about
herself and her mission, and then I'll close my testimony.
Can you raise your hand, Ms. Smith?
all right could you state your name and spell for the court reporter
this is tamar smith if you're in the virtual audience please raise your hand
any hands up hey luck
i can see him in the audience but the hand's not going up sir sorry
Ms. Smith?
Mr. Consul, you're an officer of the court. We will recognize your testimony. Questions
from the board? No, Mr. Chairman. No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience? I see no further hands, Mr. Chair. Planning
Commission. Thank you, Chair Bergman, Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
Members of the Board, in 2014, the zoning map was amended on this block from RM1 to RSA5.
We believe the applicant has demonstrated that the proposed use is needed and not otherwise
available in this area, and so we recommend that the Board grant the variance, but we would also
recommend a proviso that the specific use be limited to supervised care for children
and that a five-year temporary variance be granted in this case because the use applied
for in the zoning application would allow this to be transferred and used as a SRO for
other under a different owner if for some reason this doesn't work out.
We are comfortable with that.
um am i 2021 004 905 2503 sharjo street i vote yes proviso um supervision of children i think
you sit in and the second thing five year which would go to
um we'll make it 2027 april 1st is that okay tanya
yes chair um uh that would be fine okay so i vote yes with that proviso
Harold Tenere my vote is yes with Proviso. Thomas Holland my vote is yes with Proviso.
James Snell yes with Proviso. Thank you board I'll see you guys in five years.
Have a good day. Oh my god that's good. 20th is seven okay.
MI-2021-004-900-4233 Glenview Street.
Jen's in as attorney.
Been about to speak, sir.
Good morning.
Hi. Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Yes. Zen Jin, Z-H-E-N, last name J-I-N, 1617 John F. Kennedy Boulevard, Suite 1838, Philadelphia PA 19103, here on behalf of the applicant.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Would you identify your client in a relationship to the property?
Yes, my client's name is Lynn Wei.
Last name is L-I-N.
She is the owner of the property.
All right, thank you.
Our vice chair has a few questions for you.
Hi, Mr. Jin.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal
and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed the exhibit packet
with proof of ownership tax compliance,
a copy of the referral or refusal,
voters under plans of the property
five days in advance of this hearing and have you met with your RCO and do you have a letter
from them? Yes to all questions. Okay you may proceed and please share your screen. Thank you.
Thank you. I am sharing the information we submitted to the zoning board. Can the board
see everything that's on my screen? Yes. Thank you. We have submitted a copy of the refusal,
the support letter from Taconi Civic, prior granted decision from the ZBA, photos plans,
and other related documents. To give a little perspective on the history of why we're here
today, this application was actually before the ZBA about two years ago, three years now,
and was granted by the ZBA for the same exact use that we're now reapplying for. What happened is
that my client had obtained the grant and then forwarded it to someone, an architect,
to go ahead and pick up permits based on the grant of the refusal. That, combined with the
pandemic, apparently the permit was never picked up on time before the grant was fully expired.
before the grant was fully expired, so we're now back before the board again with the same
So we're now back before the...
application requesting a renewed grant for the same use that was previously granted,
and that is an application to use this property as a two-family dwelling. This property is zoned
RSA 5. However, the community is aware, and their letter actually indicates that both the property
itself historically was built as a duplex. It simply wasn't used as a duplex by one of the
prior owners, which may have reduced it back to the RSA 5 zoning when zoning was changed,
but it was built as a duplex and is structured as such. So it is a pre-existing non-conforming
condition. My client actually also purchased it, and this was verified by the community in one of
their questions that they verify that this MLS listing also listed it as a duplex and was
purchased as such. So the property is a pre-existing non-conforming condition of a duplex.
It was a legal duplex. It was built as such. It just simply wasn't used as much as such by a prior
owner, which led to my client needing a variance when they acquired it to maintain it as a duplex.
The community's main concern is they do not want a triplex here, and certainly my client agreed that a duplex would be the final use, and we would certainly not try to convert this into a triplex in any way.
their main concern is that this is one of those elevated buildings where it's two stories above
ground however the first the basement is really at ground level and we're going to make sure that
the basement will not have any living spaces and it's simply used as shared storage by the upper
floor units and that is one of the provisals that the community requested and my client agreed to
the other simply to make sure that it is maintained as a duplex and not a triplex
This was all done at the time and was agreed to at the time. This is, again, a reapplication essentially of the same things that we have previously agreed to and certainly worked with the community on.
And as such, the community certainly does not have any objections to our proposal. I'm going to try to make the plans a little more sized legibly.
So the main concern here is that we were asked to make sure the plans does not allow any bedroom or any living space in the basement.
All living spaces are located on the first and second floor.
Essentially, these are existing situation.
I will show photos in a second to show that they are already in that condition.
The basement will have the washer, dryers, utilities, and outdoor.
it's directly accessible storage and utility for both units, which will also help with
managing any overflow of items from the other two units. The property is already built and
existing. And again, it was built as a duplex at the time. And I'm sorry, I'm going to zoom into the
photos. They're a little blurry. My apologies for that. But essentially, the property has been
existing in this status of duplex for some time this is also consistent with how some of these
area buildings were built the corner ones and the ones like my clients were actually legal duplexes
as you can see this is an existing property in existing condition this is not a new renovation
and we're not looking to convert anything at this point there are two kitchens within the property
this is some of the bedrooms here's one of the kitchens and there's another photo coming up of
the second kitchen in the space and here's another kitchen of the property so we would ask the boards
of favorable review of this application both based on the prior non-conforming use as well as a prior
grant in this matter and the current continuous support of the community this it would be a
hardship for my client to have to convert this property to a single family dwelling at this
point as it was never built as such thank you and I'll be happy to redirect to any part of the
exhibits or answer additional questions well you want your client to adopt your testimony
yes can Lin Wei please raise your hand virtually to be identified
if not i would do as you also the court we take your testimony questions from the board
questions no mr chairman mr chairman no mr chairman questions or comments from the virtual audience
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hands at this time, Chair.
Planning Commission?
Thank you.
Ian, you're breaking up, Ian.
Looks like he's frozen.
Paula, are you still there?
i am but i don't i don't have the recommendation open can the backup go on please
thank you david thank you david good morning chairman bergman david thank you f-e-c-t-e-a-u
with the city planning commission right do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth
and nothing but the truth yes sir i do thank you proceed thank you mr chairman mr chairman
members of the board the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing rsa5
single-family zoning at this location. The proposed use is consistent with the existing
physical configuration of the structure, and so the City Planning Commission recommends the board
grant the variance. Thank you. MI 2021-004-900-4233 Glenview Street, I vote yes.
Carol Tenere my vote is yes. Thomas Holloman my vote is yes. James Snell my vote is yes.
Thank you. Thank you.
MI 2021 004899 4820 Chester Avenue.
attorneys from dilworth paxton
miss meredith ferriger has been promoted to panelist
hi could you state your name and spelled for the court reporter
Sure. Meredith Ferliger, F-E-R-L-E-G-E-R, 1500 Market Street, Suite 3500E.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
But you identify your client and the relationship to the property.
Certainly. My client is 4820 Chester, LLC. That entity owns the property at 4820 Chester Avenue.
That entity is represented here today by Brahim Ingladen.
then. Our vice chair has a few questions. Hi, good morning, Meredith. Do you agree to
waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy? I do, yes. Have you emailed the
exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance, a copy of the refusal or referral,
photos and or plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing, and have you met with the
RCO, and do you have a letter? Yes, to all of the above. Okay, great. You may proceed and
share your screen and it's up okay i was like wait a minute that was fast
uh good late morning uh mr chairman members of the board as i mentioned my client here today is
4820 chester llc the property before the board is 4820 chester avenue which is a vacant property
that's at the corner of chester avenue and south 49th street my client has owned this property
for close to four years and has been working throughout that time to conceptualize a project
that would harmonize with the surrounding area and satisfy the concerns of the community.
We're incredibly pleased to be presenting the project to you today,
which has received the full support of Cedar Park Neighbors,
as is reflected in their letter that was forwarded to the Board yesterday.
The exhibit packet includes 17 exhibits. We did also submit a revised zoning
plan and revised plan provisive form, reflecting one extremely minor change that I will address.
I'll start first with a basic property overview.
As you can see on the aerial that I have up on the screen here at Exhibit 10,
this property sits right at the corner and is bordered to the northeast by a multifamily complex
that covers nearly its entire lot, as well as a single family home to the southeast that fronts
on Regent Street. Across 49th Street is the start of the concessing park. If you look at the zoning
map now at Exhibit 9, you will see that the property itself is zoned RTA1, which is residential
two-family attached. Again, if we look a little bit more closely at the photographs that I have up
Again, if we look a little bit more closely at the photographs that I have up at Exhibit 17, you can see the vacant lot here on the corner, as well as the existing structure next door at 4818 Chester Avenue.
The next photo here is looking south on South 49th Street. Of particular note, for one of the refusals that we'll address today, you'll notice that the trolley line runs up South 49th Street and makes a right onto Chester Avenue.
You'll also notice out here in the distance the 49th Street Bridge.
in the next photo you'll also see an existing utility pole that exists towards the rear of the
property and again this is a view just across the street here where you where you will see the 49
street station as well as the concessant park now looking across the street from the property on
Chester Avenue, you'll see there are several commercial retail businesses that do exist in
the single-family zoning districts. The rest of Chester Avenue contains a mix of twins and
apartment complexes. Now, historically speaking, as you can see up on the screen, 4820 Chester
Avenue contained an eight-family dwelling. That was true until shortly after my client purchased
the property. Unfortunately the property had suffered such deterioration prior to his ownership
that it was unsalvageable and was forced to be demolished despite the fact that he would be
losing out on that long-term non-conforming use. Now the current proposal that you can see here
on the zoning plan at Exhibit 6 is for the erection of a new three-story structure to
contain 12 dwelling units. The units will be a mix of one and two bedroom units ranging from 600
square feet to 850 square feet. As you can see on the elevations and renderings here at Exhibit 7,
the goal here was really to design a building that would blend with the existing brick structure
next door. This rendering as well as the next one do both reflect several modifications that
the community requested, mostly aesthetic, but the only one that specifically implicates the zoning
is the addition of this defined entry walkway, which you can see here. So that is reflected on
that revised plan that I submitted. Two of the units in this project will be reserved as affordable
pursuant to a community benefits agreement that was reached with Cedar Park neighbors that largely
follows the same structure that the city has in place as if this project had been granted a bonus.
Now before I turn to the current refusal, the board can reference the prior refusal that I
included at Exhibit 5 just to show you just how much this project has transformed. Previously the
project included eight total refusals including for 18 dwelling units, open area that was deficient
by 30 percent, insufficient rear yard, exceeding maximum height, and insufficient bike spaces.
The refusal that you will see today has been greatly reduced, having eliminated the refusals
for rear yard depth, height, bike spaces, and reducing the refusals for the number of units
and open area.
I will go through these quickly, and if the board needs clarification on any point, I'd
be happy to elaborate.
We do submit to a hardship on each of these refusals, given the lot orientation, physical limitations, and the context of this neighborhood, particularly this specific block.
Starting first with the dimensional refusals.
You will note that we received a refusal for insufficient front yard depth.
However, if you notice in the photographs, and probably more easily in the rendering, the only immediately adjacent structure at 4818 Chester Avenue does not have a front setback.
Accordingly, the structure that's proposed before the board today was designed to align with that structure to ensure there's not an unattractive inconsistency in the frontages.
Furthermore, although the property is Zone 2 family attached, attached structures are
actually prohibited in the RTA 1 district. This project is considered attached since the structure
extends to the lot line. Now regarding occupied area, RTA 1 has one of the most limiting opening
open area limitations, requiring that 50% of the lot be left open.
requiring that 50% of the lot be left open. This proposal exceeds that by roughly 18%.
In fact, if this lot were zoned RM1, only 20% would be required to be left as open space,
whereas this proposal is over 30% open. As you saw in the aerial that I will bring back up for
reference. Most of the multifamily structures on this block cover nearly 100% of their lots,
and you can see that immediately next door. You can see that in the multifamily slightly down
the block as well as across the street. The dimensional relief requested here was tailored
specifically to balance the variety of structure types and layouts on this block and to ensure
minimum impact on surrounding structures. Now regarding the multi-family use and parking,
the RTA1 district would permit two units whereas this proposal includes 12.
This lot is double the size normally contemplated for RTA1 development.
Furthermore, this property has never contained a two-family use and the RTA1 zoning is not
consistent with the predominantly higher density multifamily and commercial uses on this block.
You can see the permits that I have included here at exhibit at exhibit 13,
which I did also summarize on the exhibit list for quick reference.
Densities of the existing developments on this block range from three units all the way up to
39 units. Just a block away, also in the RTA1 district, is a recently approved 76 unit development
on Kincessing Avenue. Directly next door at 4818 Chester Avenue has 12 units, which is consistent
with the density proposed today. Constructing a two-family dwelling on this lot would result in
units that were significantly out of character with this neighborhood. Regarding finally the
insufficient parking parking on this property could only be provided from 49th street which
would be extremely dangerous in light of several conflicts that i pointed out earlier including the
existing trolley route the existing utility pole and the entrance to the adjacent single family home
there is also permit parking along 49th street along this property that would be impaired by
the addition of a curb cut. We do submit that these variances are the least minimum that will
not increase congestion, harm neighbors' properties, or impair light and air. This proposal has
transformed over the course of three years and reflects considerable community input in addition
to addressing unique hardships facing this property while balancing the lack of uniformity
on this block of Chester Avenue. A full analysis is provided in the memo of law that I've submitted
to the board at Exhibit 14, and I'd be happy to touch on any particular point in more detail
if necessary. With respect to the community, as referenced, Cedar Park's letter of support
is included. And at this point, I would bring up my client to adopt my testimony,
if the administrator could find Braheem Engladen.
Can I get Dr. Oil on this door?
Mr. Gladen, may you please raise your virtual hand so that you may be sworn in.
Could you state your name and spell it for the court reporter, please?
Hi, can you hear me?
I can.
Okay, my name is Brahim, B-R-A-H-I-M, I-G-L-A-D-E-N.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
yes sir i do proceed brahim uh have you heard all of the testimony that i have given before
the board today yes ma'am and would you agree that that testimony was true and accurate and
would you adopt that testimony as if it were your own yes ma'am thank you questions from the board
no mr chairman and mr chair no mr chairman questions or comments from the virtual audience
mr chair we have a taylor kessinger with the hand raised i will allow them to speak
um hi can you hear me hi yeah could you state your name and spell it for the court reporter please
yes my name is taylor kessinger that's t-a-y-l-o-r-k-e-s-s-i-n-g-e-r right do you swear
or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes proceed um i speak to
I speak to you as a neighbor. I live very close to this proposed development. My comments today
you as a neighbor. I look very close to this.
are solely my own. What would be good for me would be personally for this thing not to get
built because that means potentially more competition for parking, seats on a 13th
trolley, congestion, but what's good for me in this case isn't what's good for the neighborhood,
what's good for the city of Philadelphia, or what's good for the 12 households who could
potentially live in this building if it goes up. I think this is exactly the kind of reasonable
size infill development that's badly needed in this neighborhood we've seen very little
development here i think the median age of buildings here is prior to 1935 or something
um it's crazy um in addition the absence of parking makes this a an environmentally friendly
responsible development especially so close to major transit lines um it's very likely the
families who move into this place will not bring cars with them at all so for these reasons i uh
would urge the zoning board to grant
the requested variances. Thank you.
Thank you very much for your phone call.
Any other comments?
I have a handout from Mr. Benjamin
Hi. Could you state your name
and spell it for the court reporter?
Yes. Benjamin Shea.
B-E-N-J-A-M-I-N
Do you swear
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Rashid.
Thank you.
Members of the board, I'm coming as also a neighbor in Cedar Park, and I also testify in support of this project at 4820 Chester.
This lot has long been a blighted presence along 49th Street, and the proposed use, I definitely agree with the testimony
that is a totally contextual and conforming use multifamily consistent with many, many other uses and characters along the block.
I would also like to also express that RTA1 zoning is totally inappropriate here,
given the existing preponderance of the multifamily including the one right next to it,
as such an RTA1 lot would not be able to on this very narrow lot probably would not be viable at
all. I would also like to express the fact that this is located right on Chester Avenue right on
the 13th trolley and that I would be passing by this place every single day. I would be grateful
for the fact that there will be more units available for just the growing you know the
demand and popularity of Cedar Park, both for students and for workers and for, you
know, people of all ages to come into this neighborhood.
Thank you so much.
Thank you for your call.
Any other questions or comments different than what we've already heard?
Mr. Chair, we have Gabriel Gottlieb with his hand raised, I have allowed him to speak.
State your name and spell for the court reporter, please.
Gabriel Gottlieb, G-A-B-R-I-E-L-G-O-T-T-L-I-E-B.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do, Chair.
Proceed.
Hi, my name is Gabriel Gottlieb. I live at 4804 Chester Avenue, a few doors down from this site.
I just want to say a couple of brief things. I concur with my neighbors.
this is the multifamily building there I think is the only thing that would be appropriate for this
site. This intersection at 49th and Chester probably has the most public transit of any
intersection west of the Schuylkill except at 30th Street itself. You have the regional rail,
you have the 13th trolley, and most importantly you have the 64 bus which goes from Fairmont Park
all the way down to the Columbus Boulevard shopping centers and I use it very frequently myself.
So with the level of public transit here, it's appropriate, only appropriate to have a multifamily building.
I only have a couple of complaints about this particular development.
I think it should actually be a little taller.
The original proposal called for four stories and maybe a few more units, which I think would have been more appropriate considering the public transit at this site.
And many buildings, including my own, I mean, there are probably about a dozen four-story buildings on Chester Avenue, including my own and three others.
around 48th and Chester.
One other little complaint that I have
is I just think it's a real missed opportunity
not to have a retail space
at this important transit-oriented intersection.
It's right across the street from the train station.
When people come out,
they'll come up the stairs,
they'll see this building.
And I just think it's, like I said,
just a missed opportunity
to at least have a small retail space.
You don't have that much retail
between Baltimore Avenue and Woodland Avenue.
So to have like a little coffee house
across from the train station
crossing the train station, which is a great thing I've had for the neighborhood and for
which is a great thing I've had for the neighborhood and for all the travelers
all the travelers and stuff. But other than that, I definitely am in favor of building
this multifamily building. I think that's the only appropriate zoning and only appropriate
construction that should be at this site. Thank you.
Thank you. Thank you very much. Any other comments?
Sir, Mr. Alex Schieffer-Decker with us, Andres. I'd love him to speak this time.
hi could you could you state your name and spell for the court reporter my name is alex
schieferdecker that's s-c-h-i-e-f-e-r-d-e-c-k-e-r do you swear a firm to tell the truth the whole
truth and nothing but the truth yes i do do you have something different or than what we've heard
in the past sir uh just a little um i i support the proposal and i agree with my neighbors i just
want to reiterate a point made by the lawyer for the applicant. This project is very similar
to the situation confronted by the ZBA about a year ago at 48th and Chester, one block away.
And the ZBA concluded in that case, and should also include here, that the zoning for this area
is completely incongruent with the past and present condition of this neighborhood. The
zoning is also incongruent with the future of this neighborhood as envisioned by the Thrive
vision of the philadelphia 2035 comprehensive plan this project will add affordable housing
it will add a mix of housing different income levels it will provide housing adjacent to high
frequency transit it will reuse a vacant lot and it will add to the property tax base those are all
specific goals enumerated in the plan so there's ample reason to grant the uh grant the appeals
in this case so for all those reasons i urge you to grant it thank you thank you very much
any other comments there are no hands at this time planning commission thank you chair bergman
ian hegarty for the philadelphia city planning commission members of the board i just want to
have to note at the beginning the agreement for affordable dwelling units is not enforceable by
the city it's not a factor in the city planning commission's recommendation in this case
the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing rta1 zoning with regard to the
dimensional variances, we find the proposed dimensions to be consistent with the adjoining
structure. With regard to the proposed use variance, we find no strict hardship stemming
from unique conditions of the lot. However, the proposed use is consistent with the adjacent
nonconformity cited by council and with the comprehensive plan recommendation to encourage
transit-oriented development. So the City Planning Commission recommends that the board grant these
variances. Thank you. Meredith, your revised plans, how many pages is in that? One. Okay, thank you.
MI 2021-004-899-4820 Chester Avenue, I vote yes with revised plans, one page.
Harold Tenneri, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Thomas Holliman, my vote is yes with Proviso. James Snell, yes with Proviso.
Ishmael Shaheed, yes, we're provisor.
Tanya, you had something to say?
Yes, Chair, I didn't know if the plans were reviewed, the proviso was reviewed already.
I did address it, yeah, the only addition-
No, I'm talking about by an attorney.
Oh, okay.
On the ZBA, typically proviso plans forms have to be reviewed and approved before granting.
i did send it with our packet last week yes we're currently not with an attorney
so we wouldn't need to hold this vote chair all right so all right we're going to hold this vote
till till next week okay thank you can you resend the vote please
MI 2021-004-899-4820 Chester Avenue.
We will hold the vote until next week.
Thank you, Chair.
Thank you.
Thank you.
MI 2021-003-790-5019 Beaumont Avenue.
We're here for 5090, 19 Beaumont Avenue.
Ishmael Henrich.
Hi, this is Tanya Chair.
I believe this might be one of the cases where we did not receive any exhibits.
okay okay okay so this case is continued must be tried thank you
Okay, so this case is continued, must be tried.
Thank you, Chair.
11, 12.
I think that's me.
Is there anyone else in the audience whose case has not been heard?
No hands, Mr. Chair.
Okay, we are off until 2 p.m.
Thanks, everyone.
Okay, thank you.
Thank you, everyone.
Thank you.
Recordings begun.
Thank you. All on you, Chair.
My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing this afternoon's EVA hearings.
With me is Carol Tenere, our Vice Chair.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Ismail Shaheed, our Board Secretary.
Should be here shortly.
Okay. Thomas Holliman, our board member.
Yes, Mr. Chairman.
James Snell, our board member.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Also is our Executive Director, Tanya Sunkett, and our Attorney, Rebecca Cole.
Before we begin, here's our virtual format. Be advised, these proceedings are being recorded.
By participating, you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded.
The video will be available by contacting tonyasunkett at phila.gov.
For the benefit of our court sonographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
If you are participating by phone, if you wish to testify, press star 9 to raise your hand and star 6 to unmute.
To enter an appearance statement, call 267-270-5548. Leave your email address and the
address of the property in question. And lastly, please note the question answer box is not for
testimony or comments. Any comment should be directed to Tanya Sunkett, our executive board
member. Let's start with continuances. I have number one, MI 2022-000273 as continued. Does
anyone have any questions or statements concerning that continuance? What is that address? Yes,
Thank you. 1238 to 46 Belmont Avenue. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Okay. That case is continued. Is there any other continuances requested?
Mr. Chair, Mr. Stephen Pollack has his hand raised. I will allow him to speak at this time.
Good afternoon, Chairman Bergman and members of the board. Stephen Pollack with regard to
Could you state your name and spell it for the court reporter, please?
Yes, Your Honor.
Stephen with a P-H Pollock, P-O-L-L-O-C-K.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do, Mr. Chairman.
Proceed.
Asking for a continuance of case 934 to 44 East Passionk Avenue.
We had an initial RCO meeting and need a second one, but I have a special request.
We have another hearing scheduled for the same property because we had to split the use and the sign applications up.
So I have a hearing of June 8th, 2022 at 3.30 p.m. at ZP 2021 012 683 that we'd like to just have the current case in front of you today consolidated to that date.
so that we can have the use and the signage case heard at the same time.
Tanya, is that possible?
Yes, Chair. We can do that for Mr. Pollack.
We can do it, sir.
I appreciate it. Chairman Bergman and Administrator Sunkett, thank you very, very much.
That would be our request for today, Mr. Chairman, members of the board.
Thank you.
Thank you very much. May I be excused?
Thank you. Take care.
And any other continuances?
Sir, I have Mr. Rich DeMarco with his hand raised.
I will allow him to speak at this time.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. DeMarco, you've already been sworn today.
What case?
525 South 42nd Street.
I'm requesting a continuance because we have met with the RCO
and have done a significant revision of the plans,
and we are seeking an amended refusal and we are in that process right now so I ask for a
continuance of this matter what number is that seven carol number seven yes
What number is that, 7, Carol?
Number 7, yes.
Okay, hold on one minute.
I'll be right with you.
number number seven 525 south 42nd street mi2022 000280 continued
thank you thank you mr demarco have a good day any other cases
sir mr leonard reuter with his hand raised i will allow him to speak at this time
Mr. Chair, this is Commissioner Shahid Amir.
Good, thank you.
Hi, hello, members of the board.
Hi, how are you?
I'm fine.
Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter?
Sure, Leonard Reuter, L-E-O-N-A-R-D, last name is R-E-U-T-E-R.
I'm not asking for a continuance.
I just want to confirm that there were two appeals against L&I scheduled for this afternoon
involving 7542 Thoron Avenue, that's T-H-O-U-R-O-N Avenue, that those were filed with the wrong
board and that they've been dismissed.
They're going to bring those to the Board of L&I Review.
I didn't see them on the list today, sir.
I guess that means they were taken off then.
Maybe Ms. Sunkit can confirm.
Yes, they were removed from the list
and re-sent to the administrator of LI and I review board.
Okay, thank you so much.
That concludes my business.
May I be excused or probably?
Yes, yes.
Thank you so much.
Any other continuances?
I see no further answers, Mr. Chair.
We have an add-on.
Add on, MI 2020-003442-1617 Fawcroft Street.
The attorney was Raymond D'Arizio, and Sloan Folks was getting the RCO back.
This is a resumptive hearing.
Mr. D'Arizio.
Mrs. Derizio and folks have been provided to panelists, sir.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the board.
Raymond Derizio for 1677 Falkrod Street.
Could you spell your name for the court reporter, please?
Yes, that's D-O-R-I-Z-I-O.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
And I remember this case, we resumed this because Mr. Folks was in the process of having the RCO meeting.
Yes, we needed to have that.
That was held on March 24th, I believe, Thursday, March 24th.
I haven't received any correspondence since then, but I'm sure maybe the board did or whoever else.
Mr. Folks, are you there?
Good afternoon, Chairman Bergman.
ZBA board, so long folks.
State your name, you've already been sworn.
Thank you, sir.
Yes, there was a hearing, there was a meeting on that date.
The RCO did forward a response to our office, which we forwarded to the ZBA.
It came in late to us, and we only got it early yesterday afternoon before noon.
We also submitted a written response, but that was late also.
And there was another letter from the Community Association that came in that was included.
In total, we submitted three letters to the RCO. I don't know if you received them because of their late submission, and I also know that Council Saleta is no longer with the ZBA now, so we did forward them to all of the respective parties on the email list.
Mr. Folks, excuse me, Mr. DeRizio, we also have a letter. I think you're aware of it, Mr. Chairman, from the Councilwoman.
Right, right.
So, Mr. Folks, could you at least, I don't think Mr. DeRizio has this, could you let him know where we stand on this?
Okay, well, our office, and I will forward a letter to Mr. DeRizio.
unfortunately i'm sorry that he did get a letter from the rco but the rco um is not in uh is in
opposition and if the uh cba wants me to read that letter into the record i can do so is that
is that something they would like go ahead mr folks okay give me a moment please i have to put it up
Okay, give me a moment, please. I have to pull it up.
Okay, I apologize. Here we go.
Okay, this is the letter from the RCO.
And it reads as follows, March 30th.
The Frankfort Act Zoning Committee had a Zoom meeting on Thursday, March 24th, 2022.
The applicant was seeking a variance for personal vehicle repair maintenance within an existing structure.
This property has been on our nuisance car repair shop list for a few years.
The above address was submitted to Councilman Maria Canina Sanchez's office.
That address is 1677 Polk Rashid.
And we have numerous, have had numerous complaints about the above address from block captains, the fire department, whose car repair shop is next door to them, as well as a business, our way.
The Philadelphia Planning Commission had to redirect traffic because of the nuisance car repair shops.
Cars and vehicles block the roadway and junk cars remain on the streets for months at a time.
This business has a valid and current business license to operate.
The Frankfurt Zoning Board is denying the request and it is our recommendation that this business be shut down.
Sincerely, Thomas Garland, RCO Chairman.
And Mr. Folks, the position of the councilwoman is against it too, right?
Yes, and I do want to read her.
She asked, requested that I read her letter into the record.
Also, if I have a second to pull that up, I apologize.
Here it is.
Dated April 5th, 2022, regarding 1677 Folkroy Street, Dear Chairman Bergman, I am writing this letter in reference to the zoning appeal for the application, which was heard by the Zoning Board of Adjustments, ZBA, on April 6th, 2022, at 2 p.m.
The applicant has met with the RCO and has garnered a letter of opposition.
During the RCO meeting, near neighbors expressed the following concerns regarding daily business operations.
One, the legalization of this existing business has been a bad neighbor, leaving unrepaired autos on the streets for months at a time.
Point number two, unresponsiveness by the vendor over the years to community complaints and concerns.
And point number three, the belief that the business will continue to operate in the same manner.
Over the past three years, this office has worked with several city agencies, including the 15th Police District, the Department of License and Inspection, and the Department of Neighborhood Services to address the overwhelming number of unlicensed auto repair shops that operate in the Frankfurt community.
Recently, our office, working with these agencies and the community, has gained a foothold in addressing this issue with over 100 abandoned autos removed from the streets and a tremendous number of these illegally operating businesses closed.
Through the testimony at the community meeting and discussions with near neighbors, this applicant has not exhibited a level of responsiveness to issues or concerns their business calls to the community that this office is comfortable with.
Given these concerns and the outcome of the community meetings, we are sending a letter of opposition to this various requests.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
Thank you, Mr. Folks.
Mr. DeVruzzi, do you have any comments?
As was mentioned, there's a shop next to my clients.
And a lot of the opposition and a lot of the concerns were to do with that shop, that they were causing a lot of problems.
We did offer many different proposals to try to address the community's concerns, which chiefly was parking.
And my client has a lot that fits seven automobiles inside.
And we are fine with having any proviso in the permit that would keep cars off of the street and for work to only be done to the shop and for cars only to be parked there.
The street is mainly commercial.
There's only a few residential properties on the block.
There's a church across the street.
but you know there were we were trying to work with the community in whatever way and address
whatever issue they had as far as how could we address the concern at least for parking we can
we didn't hear really any other ideas besides that but I think a lot of majority what was heard
were that neighbors from around the corner or from the other blocks near neighbors were really
or from the other blocks near neighbors were really pointing out that the shop next door was
pointing out that the shop next
a problem. You know, we're here, we applied for this permit a while back. I'm not sure what the
status is to the place next door, whether they applied. I believe this building was
formally granted a permit to operate several years ago. So, you know, my client is presenting
herself and we'll try to address whatever issues there are. If there's further ideas
that are that are brought to us about what we can do to address those concerns my client
certainly opened to them but as far as the congestion issue you know she's fine with any
type of um uh proviso that could be placed that would restrict those issues you know those issues
and those concerns and and that was basically what we got out of out of the meeting all right
thank you does uh the board have any additional questions no mr chairman
anyone in the virtual audience have questions or comments
i see no hands mr chair or any commission have you taken a position on this case yet
no sir we have not okay could you please certainly uh good good afternoon members of the board david
Defecto, City Planning Commission, the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing
commercial mixed-use zoning at this location.
The applicant's hardship claim is not supported, with evidence of unique physical circumstances
or conditions of the property.
We further believe that the proposed variance will substantially or permanently injure the
appropriate use of adjacent conforming properties, and so the City Planning Commission recommends
that the Board deny the variance.
Thank you.
MI 2020-003-442-1617 Falkrod Street, I vote no.
Carol Tenere, my vote is no.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is no.
James Snell, my vote is no.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is no.
Thank you. 1901 Gerrard Avenue, MI 2022-001-031.
attorney Hercules Griegos Mr. chair miss Melanie Lacey has been promoted to panelists fine
good afternoon mr chairman members of the board melanie lacy m-e-l-a-n-i-e last name l-a-c-e-y
i'm with claire harrison harvey in bransburg 1835 market street suite 1400 philadelphia ta
you swear a firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
Could you identify your client and the relationship with the property?
I'm accompanied by Sherman McLeod, who's the president and CEO of Philadelphia Technician Training Institute.
And there are some other parties present as well who I'll identify shortly.
Our vice chair has a few questions.
Good afternoon.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership tax compliance a copy of the refusal or
referral photos under plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing and have you met
with the rco and do you have a letter i do and i will share my screen if i'm permitted great you
may proceed. Thank you. Sure. I'm just, I apologize, I'm trying to share my screen.
here we go okay are you able to see it we are wonderful okay so as mentioned i represent the
applicant which is philadelphia training technician training institute and they are seeking to expand
an existing educational facility located at 1901 West Howard Avenue, and the proposed expansion
requires variances for special exception relief and variances as well as special exception relief,
which I will describe momentarily. So for context, Philadelphia Technician Training Institute,
which I will refer to as PTTI for short, is a vocational school that offers a technology-based
training environment that is instructor-led and hands-on and the
That is instructor-led and hands-on, and the programs include, but aren't limited to, welding technology, manufacturing and automation, automotive training and repair, and concrete masonry and framing.
programs include but aren't limited to.
And what we celebrate about PTTI is its track record of empowering Philadelphia youth with valuable skills at an affordable price and a pipeline to gainful employment with family sustainable wages.
and oh sorry and this is really a first-class operation that is changing lives in the community
so as mentioned i'm accompanied by sherman mcleod as well as um sandra farmer who is a director
of business development and hr at ptti i'm also accompanied by robert lynn from lynn architects
rondo mobley from rogerio plant engineering and all parties will be available to answer
any questions that you may have after my testimony. So to start, we met with the affected RCOs,
which include Celestial CDC and Brewery Town Shardswood on March 17. And we received
overwhelming support for the application as evidenced by the meeting summary and letter of
support. And we also received, this is a letter of support, we also received a letter from Gerard
Garden, which is an independently operated community garden that's also located on the
subject property, but run by volunteers. So now I'd like to situate the property, which fronts
on West Gerard Avenue, and it encompasses the entire block between North 19th and North 20th
Street, and it's bound by South College Avenue at the rear. So this next view of the property
identifies approximate lot boundary lines in red and the area where the proposed building
addition would be constructed in the yellow circle. So as mentioned, this is only an expansion
project. And as you can see, the building is an L, has an L formation alongside Girard Avenue and
North 19th Street. And the front entrance is right here on Girard, if you can see where I'm hovering.
And the building addition, like I said, is between the building and Girard Garden,
which provided that letter of support that I referenced a moment ago.
So here are some images of the property in the surrounding area. First, the southwest corner of
the property, there's a gas station on the opposite side of the road, I believe it's a
Conoco now. This is the corner of the property, northeast corner and south. Here's the front
of the property with some city bike racks available for rent, as you can see.
This is the northeast corner on South College Avenue. And finally,
the parking lot at the rear. And you can see that its landscape is quite manicured,
and there's a sidewalk running along the perimeter of the entire property.
Here are images of a proof of posting, and here is the zoning map.
So the property is zoned RM1, which, as you know, stands for Residential Multifamily,
but it's located across the street, like I said, from that Conoco gas station.
There's also several ground-level commercial spaces on the opposite side of this portion of Westward Avenue,
And you can see that there are CMX2 and CMX3 zoned properties in close proximity.
So finally, here is the site plan.
So it shows the proposed changes with the expansion being the orange portion.
The expansion involves a two-story building with a basement and roof deck.
and the addition has a gross floor area just under 10,000 square feet. There's landscaping
that includes that's included along the front of the building here this green portion
which is consistent with existing conditions. There's a patch of grass running along the front
of the building all the way around and also plantings would be installed by the existing
parking lot. And you can see there's one curb cut on the property right here at the back
on South College Avenue. And the existing parking I'll mention adequately accommodates
parking needs, particularly because a portion of the student population has historically
used public transportation or bicycles to commute to class. There's also five bicycle
racks or parking spaces, proposed in this area that I'm hovering over by the new plantings.
In addition to those city bikes located at the front of the building, that's
In addition to those city bikes located at the front of the building that I showed you earlier.
So here are the building elevations.
I'll note that the facade of the building will match the existing building, which is predominantly brick, with steel paneling around some of the windows.
And here are some 3D renderings of the property where you can see the proposed roof deck.
So I'll highlight that the proposed roof deck is for educational purposes only. It's a valuable
part of the construction trades program, which would allow coursework and HVAC and carpentry.
therefore it would give students exposure and familiarize them with working in elevated
environments. So this is hands-on immersive learning experience that I mentioned before
is central to PTTI's mission and it's a conventional roof surrounded by a 42-inch
high brick parapet railing and accessed by walking up the enclosed stair tower that I'm hovering over
here that opens, um, has an opening, uh, to the top landing. Um, I'll also point out that the
building height at two stories is consistent with the surrounding buildings. So here is,
I feel a little load. Okay. Here is the refusal letter and I'll walk you through what exactly
we're seeking. So we filed a zoning use permit for the proposed expansion and received this refusal
letter on December 15th of 2021. As you can see, there are four refusal items. I'll zoom in.
First, the proposed expansion includes a roof deck for a non-residential use, which isn't permitted
in the RM1 zoning district. As mentioned, this portion of West Gerard Avenue has ground-level
commercial properties in the RM1 portion, and it's surrounded by CMX2 and CMX3 zone properties
close by. And I shared with you the reason for the proposed roof deck, which is educational
purposes only and not recreational. Second, the setback distance of the proposed roof deck
requires aberrance. So I'll note, and I'll actually go back to
the rendering so that you can see that there is an existing setback, which I'm hovering over.
The building itself is set back from the roadway. There's a sidewalk, there's
grass. So it already has a setback, but not at the top of the building.
And going back to the refusal, the third refusal item is the special exception relief for the educational facility in the RM1 district.
I'll clarify that there's already a permit in place for this use, but the proposed expansion requires us to seek ZBA approval.
And finally, we are seeking a minor parking variance to permit 29 spaces where 33 spaces
are required. Again, this relates to the existing parking lot that I described earlier, and the
variance relief would be de minimis. And there's also multiple alternate modes of transportation
with the city bikes up front, the bike spaces near the parking lot, and public transportation
on Westward Avenue. So that summarizes my testimony on the application. I have my client
Sherman McLeod present to adopt my testimony, so if you would promote him, he can be sworn in.
Mr. Sherman McLeod, are you in the audience?
I believe you need to raise your hand, click the raise hand feature.
Mr. McLeod has been allowed to speak.
Would you state your name and spell it for the court reporter, please?
could you state your name please
mr mccloud can you unmute yourself okay can you hear me now we can could you
We can. Could you state your name and spell it for the court reporter?
state your name and spell for the court reporter yes my name
Yes. My name is Sherman McLeod, S-H-E-R-M-A-N-M-C-L-E-O-D.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Proceed, counsel.
Sherman, did you hear my testimony that I provided to the board this morning for afternoon, I should say?
Yes, I do, and it's factually correct.
Thank you. So you affirm that it's factual and correct, and you adopt it as your own?
Yes, I do.
Wonderful. So is there anything that you would like to share very, very briefly
on how PTI has been an asset to the community?
Yes. PTTI over the last seven and eight years have been able to get people in the community of
Philadelphia jobs in order to schedule for, can you hear me?
Yeah, we have been able to get jobs for people over $25 an hour in the community, which the people have been able to get jobs in order to make sure that they are able to
Fulfill jobs over skilled labor and whether or not it's people who are able to qualify for jobs over the ability and an ability to be able to for jobs.
that that they are able to um and uh whether they were incarcerated or not
and being able to be incarcerated they don't need to qualify for any other opportunities other than
skilled labor
thank you chairman so that concludes our presentation and we'd be happy to address
questions questions from the board no mr chairman no mr chairman no mr chairman
questions from the virtual audience
you know i have mr chair planning commission good afternoon david fecto city planning commission mr
chairman members of the board the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the residential
multifamily zoning at this location the application for expansion of a school matches the character
of the block the applicant has shown that the expansion of a school will have no more of an
impact than a school expansion would be expected to have and of course that's the standard for
granting a special exception and neither the roof deck its placement nor four fewer parking spaces
than required will impair the use of adjacent properties so the city planning commission
recommends the board grant the special exception and the use variances thank you david mi2022
zero zero one zero three one 1901 west rod avenue i vote yes carol tennari my vote is yes thomas
Solomon my vote is yes. James Snell my vote is yes.
Thank you. Thank you. MI 2022 000 393 202 Rifka Street Mr O'Brien.
William O'Brien, attorney.
Mr. O'Brien, O'Brien has been promoted to Panama, sir.
Thank you.
Mr. O'Brien, state your name and spell for the court reporter.
uh good afternoon mr chairman my video apparently is not functioning
um would you uh need some time to try to get it together and we'll call you a little later
uh yes that would be great thank you we'll put you off to the end okay thank you all right
MI 2022-000224-2460.
0-0-0-2-2-4-2-4-6-1-Gall Street, and I believe MI-2022-0-0-2-2-6-2-4-5-9-Gall Street can be heard together.
Rachel Pritzker's firm.
Mr. Severn has been promoted to panelist now.
Good afternoon.
My counselor, how are you?
Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter?
Brandon Saverin, B-R-A-N-D-O-N, S as in Sam, A, V as in Victor, R-A-N.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client and the relationship to this property?
The client is Keen Property Group, LLC, spelled K-E-E-N, and they are the owner of both of the properties you referenced, Mr. Chair.
And you can handle both.
You're going to handle both at the same time.
That'd be preferable.
Our vice chair has a few questions.
Hi, Mr. Saverin.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, we do.
Okay. Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership tax compliance, a copy of the refusal or referral, photos and plans of the property, five days in advance of this hearing, and have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
Yes to all of the above.
You may proceed and share your screen. I keep thinking I have it all memorized, but I don't.
It's a long list.
It is.
okay uh one moment while i share my screen here
i'm sorry one more second here
oh bear with me i'm very sorry i'm having a um it it's gonna work it just wants me to um
change a privacy setting here you go allow the
um i'm very sorry i'm i'm going to um i'm going to have to ask that you come back to me it's not
um allowing me to share my screen and i think let me do sorry this is tanya hi tanya we have
Ms. Prisker with her hand up, maybe to assist? Yes, I'll be back on in 10 seconds. It just
wants me to restart. Okay, we're fine. Go ahead. Go ahead. We're good. We're good. Go ahead. Thank you.
Chair, we're going to
have Rachel speak to this
if it's okay with you.
she's going to handle it
she can just speak for now
Jason to see what her request is
understood
good afternoon
chairman members of the board
I was just going to see if Brandon was having
technical difficulties I can move the case
forward but I think the chairman
has expressed a very
gracious level of patience so
I'll let Brandon do his thing
I think he's close
we're good
we're good we're good thank you so much sure
now we can't hear you brandon i'm mute i'm mute
how about now we're good we're good thank you so much um you're looking at the two properties now
they're the two homes with the red brick facades. So this is 2459 and 261 Gall Street.
I will show you the Atlas map here. We're in Port Richmond, two blocks off the intersection
of Aramingo and Cumberland. And this application is to build a third-story addition on each house
as shown here and um that generated the same refusal for both properties which is
we are proposing a flush addition rather than the mandatory eight foot setback
in the front side of each home i'll explain our hardship and why we believe we qualify for
variance for that hardship um so um just so the board is aware i'll try and zoom in here a little
bit i do have the architect michael cole who produced these plans i won't call on him to
I won't call on him to testify, but he is available for questions to the extent I can't answer anything you might want to know.
testify but he is available for questions to the extent
These buildings sit on properties that are each 840 square feet.
So, you know, sort of on the smaller end of the scale as far as Philadelphia Row Homes go.
Again, they're currently two stories each and they're relatively short.
So right now, the lower floor, the first floor of each home has, I believe, about an eight-foot ceiling.
The second might have a nine.
To make a long story short, if we put this addition on each house, it's only going to rise to 31 feet to the roof line.
Now, there's going to be some additional height within the bounds of the code created by a parapet wall and a pilot house.
But again, we are nowhere near the maximum 38 feet plus a pilot house.
We're talking about an addition that would bring the homes to 31 feet, one inch plus the parapet wall and pilot house.
So back to the map here.
Just wanted to give the board a little context of what's around the property.
I think you were able to see in this image, there is already a home with a nearly flush addition right here on the corner, two doors down from us.
Behind us, I'm going to actually wheel around to the side street.
You can see that there was sort of a warehousing complex here.
This is going to be, or I believe at this point already has been torn down in favor of the construction of eight new row homes.
And I have those plans, whoop, skipping ahead, there you go.
I have those plans here.
So again, there's going to be, I believe,
eight of these built right behind us
and they are three stories each plus a roof deck.
And they will rise to a height of 38 feet
before accounting for the roof deck and pilot house.
So right behind us is going to be these homes.
And I'll go back to the map really quickly.
that is going to be located in this cluster here where my hand is. So directly behind us,
the first of those homes closest to us will be 38 feet tall with a roof deck really peering over us.
Whether or not we get this addition, even if we get this addition permitted by you today,
Again, we're only going to rise to 31 feet.
So this addition is sort of a chance to add living space to these very small houses and to do so in a way that, you know, I don't think is out of character with the block, given what's going on right behind us.
And, you know, we're not towering over anybody.
As a matter of fact, we're still going to be considerably shorter than our new neighbors.
The reason we don't want to do the eight-foot setback is because it's just not a lot of space on such a small property.
When you have to build in that front eight-foot setback, it really makes the addition not economical, not worthwhile in terms of the amount of space that would be gained.
I want to show you one other block.
So again, our block, if we build, will be a mix of three and two-story buildings, but across the corner right here on Cumberland, these are all three-story homes.
So this is what that block looks like, and we are right down this way on Gall, but this is a neighborhood where there's really a true mix of three and two-story homes, just for that context.
um beyond that uh i just wanted to share our letter of non-opposition from um councilman
squilla's office with regard to both properties and we also have a letter of non-opposition from
the rco okra with regard to both properties i do have um julia here who is the um client
representative to adopt my testimony as i mentioned i have michael call the architect to the extent
if there's any architectural questions.
I want to have your clients adopt your testimony.
Raise your hand, please.
We're allowed to speak.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman.
Hi, could you state your name and spell it for the court reporter?
Sure, it's Julia McManus, J-U-L-I-A-M-C-M-A-N, as in Nancy, U.S.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I do. Proceed. Julia, were you able to hear the full extent of my testimony today after?
Julia, were you able to hear the full extent of my testimony today after I smoothed out the tech issue?
Yes, I was.
Okay. And to the best of your knowledge, was it true and accurate?
Yes, it was.
And would you adopt it as your own testimony?
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions from the virtual audience?
i see no further hands mr chair planning commission good afternoon mr chairman members
of the board david facto city planning commission the comprehensive plan recommends no change to
the residential single family zoning for 2459 gall street and 2461 gall street although the
applicant has not shown that a strict hardship exists they have shown that the proposed third
floor additions without a front setback will not impair the use of adjacent properties so the city
planning commission recommends the board grant the dimensional variance for each property
mi 2022 00224 2461 gall street and mi 2022 000 226 2459 gall street i vote yes yes to both
properties. Carol Teneri, I vote yes to both properties. James Snell, yes to both.
Okay. Thank you. Thanks for your patience today. Sure, sure, sure, sure.
Sure. MI 2022. MI 2022 00235 5201 Levick Street. Dawn Tancredi, the attorney.
I'm sorry, Chair, if I may
for one minute, just ask
Ishmael, can you go out
and come back in? Because we're having
a hard time with your
audio. Thank you, Chair.
Log out and come back in?
Yes, you sound better now, but try
logging out, coming back in.
good afternoon hi could you state your name and spell for the court reporter please
sure it's dawn tancredi t-a-n-c-r-e-d-i right you swear to firm to tell the truth the whole
truth and nothing but the truth i do could you identify your client in relationship to the
property? Sure. My address for the record also is 2005 Market Street, 16th floor, Philadelphia, PA.
I'm here today on behalf of Burlington County Bridge Commission, the owner of 5201 Levick Street,
and the applicant in this case. Thank you. Our vice chair has a few questions. Sure. Hi Dawn,
do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy yes have you emailed
the exhibit packet consisting of proof of ownership tax compliance a copy of the refusal or referral
photos under plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing and have you met with the
rco and do you have a letter yes and we did submit the submission materials five days in advance
I did resubmit an updated packet earlier today that's great you may proceed and
share your screen thank you
Okay, so with me here today, just to give you some background or really a roadmap of where
we're going with this today. With me here today is Joseph Jacobs, who is a consultant for Burlington
County Bridge Commission. Joseph Estock, who is the engineer that prepared the plot plan.
Joseph Estock, who is the engineer that prepared the plot plan. We've got Lucky Warrick. He is with
WatchFire Digital Sign Company and he will discuss the sign specs and lighting
and also John McDonough, a land use planner. Preliminarily, I would ask that these submission
materials be incorporated into the record. So we are here today seeking approval for a
freestanding double-faced digital sign adjacent to the Tocconi Palmera Bridge.
The sign will provide benefits to the community such as public messaging
and it will produce funds that support maintenance of the bridge.
the property where the sign will be located is over 130 000 square feet it's situated
along the delaware river and near i-95 the property itself is zoned icmx and you can see
from the zoning map that it is surrounded by industrially zoned properties
The property is currently used as a utility control facility for the bridge, and there are a couple trailers and equipment that is stored on the site.
So the applicant, as I mentioned, is the Burlington County Bridge Commission.
It's a public entity that is responsible for the operation and maintenance of several bridges in Burlington County, New Jersey.
The City Law Department has issued an opinion, which in essence states that a public entity which operates and maintains bridges that cross the Delaware River is not subject to the Philadelphia zoning requirements.
The exemption is based on legislation enacted by Pennsylvania and New Jersey effectuating a compact between the states.
In particular, the opinion, which is included in the packets, does relate to the Delaware River Port Authority.
Nonetheless, the opinion relates to public entities and should apply in this instance as well.
and therefore we believe that the sign is permitted despite a refusal being issued for the use and
distance requirements. In addition, I have testimony today to show that there is a hardship
here. The site is not suitable for other uses. The site is used for storage and maintenance
equipment, it really limits the available space for other uses. And the location of the bridge
over the property further limits the use. And so with that, I would call Joseph Estock
to discuss the location of the sign.
Mr. Joseph Estock, if you're in the audience please raise your virtual hand and wait to be sworn in.
And I'm showing you another angle. This is an aerial view of the property
adjacent to the river and the surrounding industrial uses.
joseph are you there yes can you hear me yes could you state your name and spell it for the
court reporter yes my name is joseph m s stock last name is spelled e-s-t-o-c-k
and my business address is 355 south henderson road and king of pressure do you swear a firm
to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do proceed and uh mr estock can
Can you briefly discuss your experience?
With this project?
Your background and training?
Oh, yes.
I'm a graduate civil engineer and I'm licensed as a professional engineer in the Commonwealth
of Pennsylvania.
I also have a background in land surveying and I'm registered as a professional land
surveyor also in Pennsylvania.
okay and what is your role with regards to 5201 levick street uh i was hired to do a
boundary and topographic survey of the property uh on that survey i plotted the location of the
On that survey, I plotted the location of the proposed sign. Furthermore, I prepared an aerial photograph exhibit showing the location of the sign and it's set back from other existing features within the area.
proposed sign.
Okay. And can you describe where the sign is located?
i can um the subject property is 2.3093 acres uh it's bounded by uh del the unopened delaware
avenue which is currently occupied by the k and t trail to the uh to the east uh elbridge street
to the west uh a pico i'm sorry it says still not electric on me let's pico property to the north
and levick street to the south uh the billboard sign is positioned 85 feet northeastwardly from
the levick street right away and 140 feet northwesterly from the delaware avenue right away
okay and is it south of the bridge it is it is south it is south of the bridge
okay and can you describe the distance from a school or a park i i can um the the mass community
charter school is uh to the north of us uh and the the sign actually the the face of the sign not
the pole the sign is 376 feet from their property line so the school's even further away than that
that's just the property line of the school uh along uh the delaware river where the k and t
trail is there's a small park called landers point park which is adjacent to our site
um there's a paper patio there within that park and we are 200 feet from that uh that patio
do you have an opinion about the impact of um let me ask you this can you describe the
dimensions of the sign? I can. It's a double-faced sign. Each face is 14 feet high by 48 feet wide.
It's situated at a height of 55 feet from the ground to the top of the sign.
And can you describe, in your opinion, what impact, if any, the sign would have on the park or the
school uh i think it would have no impact on the park or the school the school's on the other side
of the taconi palmyra bridge so uh there's that bridge is between us and the sign which really
uh buffers it from the school and uh the the park is uh is along the banks of the delaware river
And this sign is over 55 feet high to the top.
So it's way above that park area.
And is there another sign nearby that you're aware of?
There is.
On the northerly side of the Dakota-Palmire Bridge, there are two other signs.
One is closer towards Elbridge Street.
And there's a second sign that's right along the banks of the Delaware River.
But they are both on the other side of the bridge, and they're on the same side of the bridge as the Mass Community Charter School.
Is there any concern with approving this sign because there are other signs in the area?
No, there are other signs in the area, even though they're over 300 feet away, and they're on the other side of the highway.
thank you is there anything else you would like to add there's nothing okay thank you
with that i would like to call joseph jacobs to explain
the nature of the sign on behalf of the burlington county bridge commission
mr jacobs has been allowed to speak
Could you please state your name and spell it for the court reporter?
Joseph Jacobs, J-A-C-O-B-S.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Proceed.
Mr. Jacobs, can you please describe your role with regards to this project?
Yes. With respect to this project, on behalf of the Burlington County Bridge Commission, they
On behalf of the Burlington County Bridge Commission, they brought me on board to help with the management of this sign.
And essentially, the overriding purpose is a public purpose.
They want to be able to place on the sign information that deals with the bridge, that deals with emergencies, whether those emergencies be amber alerts, silver alerts, gold alerts, and really emergencies that deal with the city of Philadelphia.
We are able to create a situation with your police department that if there is an emergency, that in real time we're able to place information on the digital billboard to help serve the public.
And in addition to that, we met with the Tycone Civic Association. And if there's any real emergency in this specific area, again, the commission would be able to place that emergency on the billboard in real time.
And in addition, the Bridge Commission has also indicated to the community, the Tycone community group, that if they have events that they like to get out to the public to promote public activities, that they would also place that information on the board.
And the third prong, with respect to advertising, the revenue would go into the general fund that would help with the maintenance and upkeep of the bridge.
Thank you.
Does the board have any questions for Mr. Jacobs?
board any questions from the board no mr chairman no mr chairman yeah yes mr chairman um so is this
an is this an agreement that is already going to be in place um with the drpa to escrow the funds
to service the bridge so the drpa is a separate authority than the burlington county bridge
commission and i believe that mr jacobs can explain further about the funds yes the the
funds would go into the general fund of the burlington county bridge commission
and would be dedicated for maintenance and operation of the bridge
so it will help the burlington county uh bridge commission offset some of the costs
with the funds going over absolutely yes okay all right no further questions mr chair
questions from the virtual audience
um actually i have um another i have two more witnesses mr bergman okay go ahead okay um
I'd like to call Lucky Warrick.
He is with the Watchfire Digital Outdoor Sign Company.
And I'd like him to discuss the specs and the light impact.
Could you state your name and spell it for the court reporter?
He has been allowed to speak, sir.
State your name and spell it, please, for the court reporter.
Wyrick, and the spelling is L-U-C-K-Y-W-Y-R-I-C-K.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Lockie, can you hear us?
Mr. Wyrick?
I think we lost him.
Can you hear me?
Do you affirm or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir, I do.
Proceed, Dawn.
Okay, could you put your address on the record?
Watchfire Sign's primary address is 1015 Maple Street, Danville, Illinois, 61832.
okay and what is your position with the company my position is the senior territory manager
for the billboard division okay and what is your role with my role
yes i'm sorry with regards to this property 5201
yes i'm sorry with regards to this property 5201 levick
using our advanced technology and i can speak to the specifics of that okay yes can you discuss
the specs that you've prepared and the light studies and the impact of the sign if any on
surrounding area? Yes, I can. We have created the newest technology which narrows the viewing angle
of the actual output of the sign to roughly 60 degrees. That's 30 degrees on each side
of the sign which alleviates any viewing points outside of that perimeter.
Okay, and can you just describe the impact on the surrounding areas, for example, any
impact that this sign would have on the school or the park?
Can I share the screen?
i'm sorry um did he request to share the screen yes so mr hand can you promote him
to a panelist please thank you
Sir, you are muted.
You'll just have to unmute yourself.
Can you see my screen now?
Okay so this particular technology is advanced and reduces the radius of the light output.
As you can see from this diagram here and this light study that we've produced, this
is one viewpoint and this is the other viewpoint.
In comparison, if we were not to use this technology, this would be the viewing.
So you can see it dramatically reduces the viewing area.
So does your light mitigation technique eliminate any impact to the school or the park?
That is correct.
It does eliminate any and all light impact to the school or the park.
Thank you.
Do you have anything further to add?
Yes, I have. The technology is advanced. I can show you this in another window of how it actually displays.
Can you see my screen here?
Do you see just the plane watch fire technology on the screen?
I believe, sir, you might need to unshare and then share again.
where do we go to
meeting controls
here we go
we can see that video just outlining our technology and then i have another video that i can share
go ahead
this is an actual drone shot of
that it reduces the viewing angle down to 30 degrees so as you commute past the sign
it starts to erase the visible end of the sign you see how it clouds up and disappears
and now you're at 30 degrees and the sign completely disappears
And now you're at 30 degrees and the sign completely disappears.
This other side is a static side, which is not applicable to this application.
Okay, I'll show you one more.
Thank you.
Mr. Warrick, can you just describe what the video shows for the record?
I can. Essentially, this is an animated version of what I had shared earlier. It's reducing
the footprint of the lag output.
Thank you for that.
And does the board have any questions?
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Do you want to proceed, Dawn?
Yes, and with that, I would call my last witness,
John McDonough, a land use planner. Mr. McDonough has been allowed to speak.
Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter? Yes. Hi, Mr. Chairman. My name is John
McDonough, M-C, capital D-O-N-O-U-G-H. All right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth,
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Yes, I do. Proceed. Mr. McDonough, can you describe
your occupation? Sure. I am a land use planner with the National Certification under AICP,
the American Institute of Certified Planners. I've been practicing for 35 plus years
and have been accepted as an expert before this commission in the past and in courts as well.
okay and what is your role with regards to 5201 levick street
well we conducted a standard planning analysis in connection with the application we review
existing conditions we review proposed conditions we review the regulatory requirements
under the city code and apply the criteria for the relief that our applicant is seeking here
and you've reviewed this application can you tell us if there are any other viable uses for this
property no it's really at the heart of the application here this is a site that is in your
icmx your industrial commercial mixed use district which is aimed at very low impact industrial uses
neighborhood commercial type uses residential given the fact that this particular site
is bisected by the bridge. We've got utility land related to the bridge commission on the one side
and on the other side as well. There is certainly a practical difficulty or a hardship
in terms of utilizing this space for as-zoned uses.
Can you tell us what impact, if any, there is on the park or school?
sure i think we have an excellent predicate of evidence before the board now as to the i'll say
typical concerns that we may have with this particular land use we are here for refusals
related to the proximity to those parks in the school and i think you have good evidence before
you now to support the claim that the impact would be minimal if any particularly with respect
to the brightness and the lighting. The park or the ball fields to the north will face the nose
of the sign and you just saw Lucky's exhibits showing how the light recedes as one starts to
take advantage from the nose of the sign and then the park to the south faces the back of the sign.
take advantage from the nose of the sign and then the park to the south.
So again, not looking at the face of the sign per se, I think this use and this
orientation is optimally located on this particular piece of land.
Okay, and is there any concern that there are other signs on the other side of the bridge?
No, again, there's good separation between those signs.
There is a sign on the other side as well.
But again, there's no direct correlation between, I'll say, the number of billboards and driver distraction, safety, and the like.
As we drive, there are objects that direct our attention all around us.
And again, no conclusive study that this particular land use would have an adverse impact from a driver safety standpoint.
Okay, so on that note, following through on your testimony, would there be any impact on traffic?
No impact on traffic. This is obviously a functionally innocuous land use.
It certainly doesn't generate any traffic, and from a driver visibility standpoint, this is not going to impede safe lines of visibility and not create a substantially adverse distraction to drivers as well.
As we drive, we may glimpse, but we don't fixate on these signs.
Thank you. And is there anything else that you'd like to add, Mr. McDonough?
Well, obviously, important to this application, which makes it somewhat distinctive, are the beneficiaries of the application.
Not only the traditional beneficiaries of being business.
I mean, this certainly is a somewhat unique form of land use in that it serves a communication purpose, much like a cell tower does.
This just happens to communicate the written word that certainly benefits business.
The companies we work for, we work with, companies we invest in are all beneficiaries of that.
Likewise, institutional uses, religious organizations, higher education, educational type uses.
And then, of course, you heard through Mr. Jacobs' testimony, the benefit of real-time messaging and emergency alerts that become an arm or an instrument of law enforcement and emergency management service,
or which serve a paramount public purpose as well.
And then lastly, most importantly,
is that the direct beneficiary of this particular sign here
is the bridge commission with these proceeds
that will help offset those maintenance costs
and those construction costs that are associated
with keeping the free flow of traffic across the bridge.
Thank you.
Are there any questions from the board?
or is that your case um yes i would just add that um we do have a letter of non-opposition
from the taconi civic association any any more questions from the board no mr chairman and mr
chairman questions from the virtual audience or comments mr chair i have mr lennon water
with his hand raised i will allow him to speak at this time
uh hello thanks uh leonard you've already been sworn so just speak sir okay great thank you um
again leonard reuter senior attorney for the city of philadelphia i was made aware of this matter
uh pretty late uh in the game uh actually pretty much as it was going on i wasn't present at the
zoning board um the planning commission of course is going to make the recommendation that they're
going to make, and that's separate and apart from my immediate concerns here, because what
I would caution the board against is making a decision based upon any argument, any legal
argument regarding whether or not the Burlington County Bridge Commission is exempt from the
zoning code or shares the same legal status or legal exemptions that the solicitor's opinion
in the uh from you know a number of years ago uh where it was determined that drpa was exempt from
at least certain zoning code provisions and the reason why i caution you against that is because
to the extent that um that argument is being offered uh that appeal should have at least
been listed as an appeal against lni um and since we had no notice that uh at least
formal modus through the application for appeal, we were
formal modus through the uh application for appeal we were i certainly wasn't prepared and and any
potential witnesses for the city were not prepared to address any legal arguments regarding uh
exemptions from the zoning code for uh bcba for bcbc so um now if again the planning commission
is going to make its recommendation on the variance uh i understand that ms tancredi has
at least put an argument on the record to preserve it in the event, you know, for whatever
reasons in the future, if it needs to be preserved for potential appeal. But, you know, again,
I would just caution the board against making a decision based upon any exemption claim. If you
did feel that you needed to address an exemption claim, then I would have to ask for a continuance
on that matter. But I would note that the appeal itself does not indicate that it was an appeal
against L&I. And again, I understand Ms. Tancredi wanting to raise the exemption issue at least
obliquely or to get it in the record. So that's what I have to say now. Again, I think it's
okay for the board. The city wouldn't object to the board making a decision simply on the
merits of the of the variance itself but but we would we wouldn't strongly urge you not to make
any decision based upon any arguments about the exemptions thank you we understand sir thank you
for your for your input um anyone else in the virtual audience there are no other hands mr
chair planning commission good afternoon chair bergman members of the board david fecto city
planning commission but we wanted to start by just reminding you that the benefits agreement
signed with the neighborhood association is not enforceable by the city so it will not it will
not factor into the commission's recommendation uh the comprehensive plan recommends no change
to the industrial commercial mixed-use zoning at the site we believe the applicant has failed
to show a hardship exists that would require a digital billboard to be placed at this location
and contravention of the space and requirements in the zoning code this is one of the few times
where a specific landmark, namely the Tacony-Palmyra Bridge, appears in the zoning code.
So City Council's intention of prohibiting billboards here is clear. The City Planning
Commission recommends that the Board deny the use in dimensional variances.
Excuse me, Mr. Chairman. Can I recommend that we hold up so we get clarity on what's going on
with both sides um and mr bergman um we're certainly willing to come back and further
discuss the exemption issue with the city uh law department if that's so thomas thomas will take
your suggestion um we will not vote on this we will take this to executive session for next week
and we'll see exactly where we stand and everybody will have a better understanding
thank you mr chairman okay dawn we'll we'll let you know within a week where we stand with this
okay thanks thank you sure
seven eight
number nine okay 9800 frankfort avenue mi 2022
2-0-0-0-0-5-3. Robert Thiel is the attorney.
I'm sorry, Mr. Jared Klein had his hand raised. I have promoted him to panelists.
That's fine.
it's uh jared klein k-l-e-i-n from blank rome 130 north 18th street in philadelphia
on behalf of the applicant right do you swear a firm to tell the truth the whole truth and
nothing but the truth yes i do uh could you identify your client and the relationship to
the property? Certainly. It's the Union League Country Club at Frankfurt Toursdale, and they're
the owner of the subject property. Our vice chair has a few questions, sir.
Hi, Mr. Klein. Do you agree to waive the reading and refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
It is a special exception referral, but yes, I do waive the reading and stip to its accuracy.
Okay, cool. Have you emailed the exhibit packet, which consists of proof of ownership,
tax compliance a copy of the special exception photos under plans of the property five days in
advance of this hearing and have you met with the rco and do you have a letter yes to all the above
okay great you may proceed and share your screen thank you very much thank you so i understand the
Thank you very much. Thank you.
So I understand the board has had a longer than expected agenda, so I will endeavor to be as brief as possible.
board has had
I'm here for two special exceptions on behalf of the Union League at their Frankfurt Toursdale Country Club location.
The gist of the application is pretty simple.
As the board's probably aware, there's an existing golf course and clubhouse at this property.
This application is seeking to add an additional part three golf course.
It's designed to be a family course with shorter halls, you know, under 150 yards and designed to increase the golfing capacity of the Union League and make that service available for additional members.
because the although the existing active recreation golf course use has been approved for some time
zoning code would consider this an expansion of the existing active recreation use so we were
issued a referral for expanding that that golf course area the other special exception we're
seeking is due to the removal of some heritage trees from from the property as with any golf
Of course, having to limit canopy coverage is essential to making the coursework.
So we are proposing the removal of 43 heritage trees.
The Union League is very sensitive to some of the concerns from the community about the removal of the trees.
And we consider ourselves very good stewards of the environment.
And as we explained to the RCO and we met with them, although the zoning code requires a certain number of trees to be replaced, we are tripling the number of trees that the code would require us to put back.
So the final product will have multiple rows of trees along the street frontages and as many trees within the context of the golf course as we can accommodate.
Just to contextualize for the board, this is the golf course here. Probably better to see from this photo here. And there's an area of trees, as you can see, that some of which have been removed already, and additional trees will be removed as construction of the golf course proceeds.
photos of posting for the board's reference posted on the entrance to the clubhouse.
We found as the Union League was doing some general ground maintenance that a number of
the trees that were there were in very poor shape. When the Union League went to start
clearing the trees that did not require special permitting, they found shopping carts,
hypodermic needles, tires, and all manner of other debris in this wooded area, including many trees
that were in pretty poor shape. I'm showing the board now just some examples of the trees that
were found there. You can see there are hulls and hollow areas in most of them, and all of this was
done by a certified arborist at the Union League retained to mark all the heritage trees and review
THOSE HERITAGE TREES THAT WERE DISEASED THAT WOULDN'T REQUIRE A PERMIT. INCLUDING THIS PHOTO
ALSO TO SEE THERE ARE A LARGE NUMBER OF TREES OF HEAVEN THAT WERE IN THE AREA TO BE REMOVED AND THOSE
AS THE BOARD MAY KNOW LIKE TO ATTRACT THOSE JAPANESE LANTERN FLIES. SO WE'RE TAKING AWAY
AN ATTRACTIVE NUISANCE FOR THOSE FLIES AS WELL AS PART OF THIS APPLICATION.
showing the board here is the area where the trees are going to be replaced as you can see
there's double rows of trees in that area and the intention is to create a as dense a buffer as we
can against the residential areas to minimize the impact of the tree removal as much as possible
this is an outline of the course again the blue shading are the replacement trees
And this is our course map to give the board a sense of what the final golf course is going to look like.
Part of this also includes the construction of an additional golf course training facility that would be located within this new golf course.
It's a rendering of what the new building would look like.
This is going to be used for golf pro lessons and, you know, to provide restrooms and other amenities for golfers.
It is not going to be an entertainment venue.
It's not going to be a place where the Union League will be hosting events.
It's designed for golf course use only.
And this is a layout just to give the board a sense of what we're doing of the facility that we're planning to build there.
And this is a layout just to give the board a sense of what we're doing of the facility that we're planning.
The actual structures themselves do not need any zoning board relief.
They would fall under the active recreation use that we're seeking here today.
Renderings of what that building would look like.
We met with the West Toursdale and Morrell Park Civic Association.
and they provided a letter of support which I'm sharing on the screen. It was a very well
attended meeting and although the majority of attendees were very supportive there were some
concerns about the removal of the trees. I think you know we're certainly sensitive to the concerns
of some of the near neighbors about wind and view that might be impacted but as we explained to the
community you know we're hopeful that although immediately there might be a difference in how
residents perceive the site over time the number of trees that we're replanting will really make
this a very much more attractive green space and really provide a better buffer for the community
than what is there now and so we were pleased that by a two to one vote the members of the
COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION VOTED TO SUPPORT THE APPLICATION. I'VE GOT MEMBERS OF THE ENGINEERING
AND DESIGN TEAM ON THE LINE IF THE BOARD HAS QUESTIONS BUT I WON'T BURDEN YOU WITH A DETAILED
PRESENTATION UNLESS YOU HAVE SOME FOLLOW-UP. I WILL ASK SCOTT LUTY TO RAISE HIS VIRTUAL
HAND SO THAT HE MIGHT ADOPT MY TESTIMONY. SCOTT, IF YOU'RE THERE, PLEASE USE THE RAISE
your hand button.
He's been about to speak, sir.
Could you state your name
and spell it for the court reporter?
Scott Lutte, S-C-O-T-L-U-T-T-E.
Do you swear or affirm
to tell the truth,
the whole truth
and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Proceed.
Thank you.
Scott, did you have a chance
to hear my presentation this afternoon yes i did and do you adopt my statements as true correct
in your own testimony if you've been given the chance to speak further yes i do thank you um
mr chair that concludes our presentation again we have the architecture and engineering team
here if the board has any further questions questions from the board no mr chairman
no mr chairman no mr chairman questions or comments questions or comments from the virtual
audience i do not see any further hands mr chair planning commission thank you sir mr chairman
members of the board david effecto city planning commission the comprehensive plan recommends
this property for parks and recreation zoning the applicant has shown that the removal of 43 heritage
trees and the construction of a new educational building will cause no greater impact than those
proposed activities would be expected to happen and that's the standard that we see in the zoning
code for special exceptions so the proposal meets the standards outlined in the code the city planning
commission recommends that the board grant both special exceptions mi 2022 00053 9800 frankfort
avenue i vote yes carol tanari my vote is yes thomas holliman my vote is yes james snell my vote is yes
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes.
Thank you all very much.
Thank you.
So I want to go back to see if Mr. O'Brien's available.
202 Ripka, MI 2022-000393, Mr. O'Brien.
Been allowed to speak.
He's been a pro-order to panelists as well.
uh good more good afternoon mr chairman william o'brien okay could you state your name and spell
it again for the court reporter for us william o'brien w-i-l-l-i-a-m o'brien o-b-r-i-e-n
mount yonk law office 4322 main street do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth
nothing but the truth i do proceed oh i'm sorry our vice chair please
do you read away with the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy
i do have you emailed the exhibit packet consisting of proof of ownership tax compliance
copy of the plans and or photos of the property a copy of the refusal or referral
five days in advance of this hearing and have you met with the rco and do you have a letter
yes to each of those items thank you you may proceed thank you may i share my
Thank you. May I share my screen?
Yes, you may.
Yes, you may.
Bill, I'm going to get it.
Bill, I'm going to get it.
I'm going to get it.
It's like decades of joy.
Mr. Chairman and members of the board,
William O'Brien sitting to my right is Gentian Kadru,
who together with his wife, Deanna,
are the owners of 202 Ripka Street.
This is a proposal to subdivide the existing lot,
keeping the existing single family home
and building a new single-family home in the second, the new lot.
There are two existing conditions which cause the refusals to be issued.
I'm going to show the refusals.
Is my screen visible?
Yes, it is.
So the refusal, there are two conditions. There are two existing conditions. One is an existing accessory structure, which is also part of a retaining wall at the rear of the property.
And the other existing condition is the slope of the lot from the front, which is Ripka Street, down the side of Smick Street is a steep slope.
The height requirement is 38 feet, as it says the limit, as proposed is 39 feet 10 inches.
When you apply the average ground level to this sloping lot, it's difficult to maintain the 38 height requirement and still have adequate ceiling heights in the rooms.
But again, I'd also suggest that it's a de minimis departure from the maximum 38 feet requirement.
The accessory structure in the rear of the property is-
Mr. O'Brien, could you start showing some photos of it as you're talking?
Absolutely. I think we'll go to-
We only have your front page here.
Okay. So this is the view from Smith Street.
this is the existing accessory structure which is incorporates a retaining wall I'm sorry Mr. O'Brien
we only have your front page Mr. O'Brien do you have separate exhibits from the title page yes I
do and I thought I was showing them let me stop sharing yes please thank you
Do you see an image now?
All right.
I don't understand.
What we see now is the table of contents.
Is that what goes with the rest of the exhibit package?
There we go.
We see it now.
We see it now?
Sorry for the confusion. So this is the existing accessory structure in the rear of the lot,
and it incorporates a retaining wall to the property to the south.
The plan is not to affect this, not to change this in any way, but to incorporate it into the
new structure, and I think a picture is worth a thousand words, then go to a rendering.
This is the proposed, this is what the proposal is, to introduce Wissick and Schist all along
the basement level, and to incorporate, again, that existing accessory structure
without disturbing the retaining wall. So the refusals were for open space, 20% open space
is required, the proposed new structure is 80% of the lot. The rear yard, which is above the
accessory structure, is the 20%. However, since there's something, this structure below it,
it was not considered open space. The context on Smick Street, this is the context rather on
Ripka Street, front of the building, you can see that it is in line and in context with the existing
houses on Ripka Street. It is not taller structure. In fact, the roof line is below. There's a parapet
above the roof line. The neighborhood met with the owners last month, and there is overwhelming
support and they've issued a letter which is page three of the package. The floor plans appear on page
The floor plans appear on page 10 of the application, at least the submission, and so you have
a two-car parking area and then the basement, first, second, third floors, and a roof deck
which will be accessed
by both stair
and by an elevator
and again it's a single family home
and the home will be occupied
by the owners
Deanna and Gentian Codre
are there any questions for me
before I introduce Mr. Codre
Mr. O'Brien the existing structure
comes down and then you build a new home
no the existing structure will remain
it will be modified
the existing porch.
So this existing porch on the side will be modified. The rear will be incorporated into
There will be a narrower porch.
The porch right now extends beyond the return wall by about five feet.
As depicted in the rendering, the new house will be attached to the existing house.
So these windows will no longer exist.
However, each of those rooms have an existing window facing south.
So there's no building code issue with that modification, and there will still be a porch
on the building, but it'll be primarily a rear porch. Okay.
If I can introduce Mr. Cadreau.
Have him state his name and spell it for the court reporter?
Yes, it's Gentian Cadreau, first name G-E-N-T-I-A-N, last name K-A-D-R-I-U.
all right do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do proceed mr codru you heard my testimony uh presenting uh your appeal yes um did everything
i say was everything i said true and accurate yes and be accepted as period you adopted as your own
yes questions from the board no mr chairman no mr questions or comments from the virtual audience
see no further hands mr chair planning commission thank you sir mr chairman members of the board
david facto city planning commission the comprehensive plan recommends no change to
the residential single-family zoning at this location this is a 4583 square foot lot
a hardship does not exist that would prevent this lot from continuing to be used in conformance
with the zoning code building on on 95 percent of the law is not strictly necessary to allow
the owner to derive value from this land and so the city planning commission recommends that the
board denied the variances uh mi2022 000 393 202 ripka street i vote yes carol tonnery my vote is
yes thomas halliman my vote is no james snell my vote is yes thank you mr o'brien
Thank you.
So, is there anyone waiting from the 2 p.m. list?
Mr. Chair, Mr. Jin's hand is raised.
I can't speak at this time.
Good afternoon.
Jin Jin, it's my understanding that we have a recalendared hearing for 1018 Wood Street.
uh this afternoon at 2 p.m um i i do not have that sir i don't have it
nope no i don't have it either um chair in light of the fact that um we did not have
um an attorney to give us the information if this was rescheduled or for a resumptive hearing
is that it mr it's based on a reconsideration request that the board granted
this was a reconsideration hearing schedule you're saying yes well okay i i no i think
we voted to reconsider that case it's just not been listed that i see
okay i mean several weeks ago we voted to reconsider that case and give it a rehearing
and give it a rehearing. Right, but if Mr. Zinn, you have documents stating that it should be
Right.
But if Mr. Zinn, you have-
scheduled for today, right? I believe so. That's why we sent in the submission. Let me just
hang on one second. I'll pull up the entire file.
So a new exhibit was submitted on April 1st.
If I may, just for one minute.
So my assistant scheduled this for today on the calendar.
That's why I'm here.
I'm not sure if I have a hearing notice on file here.
I'm looking for that right now.
Okay. Yes, we do have a hearing notice that was sent to us. I'm going to try to pull that
up. So the hearing notice was sent to us on March 3, 2022, indicating the new date is
4-6-22 at 2 p.m.
It was a letter notice
from the zoning.
So, Chair, that would be my fault.
We can go forward as you wish.
I think I remember the case.
I mean, I don't think
it's necessarily a long case.
If you have the information there.
I have submitted the exhibits
to the board and to the board's attorney
five days ahead.
I'm aware.
I'm aware.
I just need the information in front of me.
That's all if we're going to do it.
Tanya, if he's here, why don't we just get it done?
Sure, Chair.
Thank you.
Give me the case number and the case.
The address.
The property address is 1018 Wood Street.
And it is calendar number MI-2021-003824.
My remembrance, we gave this an additional hearing because the RCO changed their mind.
Am I right?
That is correct.
We have worked out a community benefits agreement with RCO.
Let's go on.
Let's handle this before we get to the 330 group.
Thank you.
MI-2021-003824-1018 Wood Street.
Thank you.
May I be?
Thank you.
I'm being...
I'm being ordered to the panel, sir.
Excuse me.
Good afternoon.
Thank you for permitting me to get forward.
You've already been sworn.
Could you answer a few questions from our vice chair?
Just a few.
Do you agree to wait the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance, a copy of the refusal or referral, photos and or plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing?
And have you met with the RCO? And do you have a letter?
Yes to all questions.
Okay, great. You may proceed and share your screen.
Thank you.
Sure. Thank you.
I am going to be sharing our updated exhibit package. Can the board see my exhibit on the screen?
Excellent. So we have submitted a copy of the refusal, a support letter from Kelleh Hill Neighborhood Association, a community benefits agreement with Philadelphia Chinatown Development Corporation, who originally objected to our proposal based on the lack of an agreement with PCDC.
We have petition support that was previously submitted as well, photos, plans, and related
documentation, including a parking agreement for the use. So to kind of refresh the board
on this application, this is an application. I apologize. I apologize. If I could just ask
Mr. Zinn, did you get a letter from me stating this was scheduled for today? Yes, I did. Okay,
I just wanted to confirm. Sure, I have the letter actually as part of the exhibits here.
This was dated March 3, 2022, to my office, stating that today, April 6, 2 p.m., will be the hearing date.
Okay, thank you very kindly.
If we could, Chair, could we pause for one moment just to make sure that all parties were notified?
All parties were notified?
Thank you.
Thank you.
Mr. Kelly, how are we holding up?
I'm doing fine, Chair.
Thank you for asking.
We're going to break it.
We'll break after this case.
That's appreciated.
Thank you.
Thank you.
I apologize. I believe there was a mix up. Okay, I have this scheduled in our system
for April 27. And your letter, I must have had the six by mistake.
Ah, I see. Okay. I mean, my understanding is we had emailed the RCOs at least as part of our
notification of the packages. So I don't know if perhaps PCDC may even be present today,
but I would certainly defer to your decision on what to do with this case.
And in order to be fair to all involved, I would humbly request that you allow us to keep
it scheduled for april 27th and i do apologize very much okay understood all right thank you
everyone we're going to take a five minute break thank you thank you
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, Chair.
we are just about at 4 p.m if as you wish the 3 30 session can begin recording let's start recording
we are recording okay my name is bill bergman i will be chairing this zba
330 hearing with me is carol tenary our vice chair carol present ismail shaheed our board secretary
present mr chair thomas holliman our board member president mr chairman and james snell our board
Thomas Holloman, our board member.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
And James Snell, our board member.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Also here is our Executive Director, Tanya Sunkett, and our Attorney, Rebecca Cole.
Our virtual format, be advised, these proceedings are being recorded.
By participating, you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded.
A video will be available by contacting TanyaSunkett at phila.gov.
For the benefit of our court sonographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
If you are participating by phone, if you wish to testify, press star 9 to raise your hand and star 6 to unmute.
To enter an appearance statement, call 267-270-5548.
Leave your email and the address of the property in question.
And last, please note, the question-answer box on the screen is not for testimony or comments.
Any comments should be directed to Tanya Sunkit, our Executive Board Administrator.
Let's start with continuances.
Do we have any continuances listed?
Anyone have a continuance for the 3.30 meetings?
See no hands-on, Mr. Chair.
Number one, MI-2021-002647-1216 Lycoming Street.
Ronald Tolbert.
Chair, just so you know, this is Tanya.
We did not receive any exhibits for this case.
Yep, and this is a must be tried.
Does that mean we're dismissing it?
No hands out?
No, sir.
I vote we dismiss this case.
Dismiss.
Thomas Holloman, dismiss.
James Snell, dismiss.
Ishmael Shaheed, dismiss.
MI 2021-005016-147 West Tioba Street.
Robert Thiel listed as the attorney I'm sorry Jared Klein
okay sir Mr. Klein has been re-promoted into panelist
good afternoon again Mr. Chair
Mr. Klein, you've already been sworn.
Could you identify your client and the relationship to the property?
Yes, my client is Ase, and they are now the owner of this parcel.
It was recently acquired from the St. Hugh Church.
Okay, our vice chair has a few questions.
Hi, good afternoon.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, I do.
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership tax compliance,
a copy of the refusal or referral, photos under plans of the property within five days of the
hearing, and have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter? Yes, to all of the above.
Okay, great. You may proceed and share the screen. Thank you. Assuming everybody can see that.
So I'm here on behalf of ASE for an application for senior housing.
The site is an RSA3 site that was previously the home of the St. Hughes Church congregation.
This proposal is seeking to put an addition on top of one of the existing structures on the former St. Hughes campus,
while leaving certain other buildings that are already existing there in their current condition.
We received a number of refusals, as the board can see, but all of them sort of relate to our adaptive reuse of the existing structure and trying to maintain the existing layout of the St.
Hugh facility. So we're seeking height because we don't want to expand outward because we're going on top of an existing structure.
and the places where we can put the accessory parking are already paved and therefore we're
trying to reutilize those as well. So that is what the sort of reuse of existing conditions
is what's driving the refusals in this case. In addition to it being RSA 3 and the proposal for
30 residential dwelling units is not allowed under code. Again these are proposed to be
Again, these are proposed to be affordable housing for seniors, seniors who are 62 plus and who meet certain income qualifications.
THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR SENIORS.
And ASE is an experienced developer of affordable housing for seniors in this area.
To give the board some context on the site, this is our location here.
But this photo really shows it better.
This is the St. Hughes campus here.
And so we're proposing an addition to one building while leaving these others alone and this existing parking area.
Some photos of the existing conditions of the site, just to give a board a sense of what is there now.
It's a very large church complex that's occupied this site for quite some time.
Photos of posting and of the street generally surrounding.
put our plans up on the board for the board to see this is the area of the addition here
only this building is being affected and the idea is to erect a vertical addition
on top of this structure here rendering for the board is here as you can see it's a we're trying
to provide a very nice product that fits in well with the architecture of the neighborhood and
creates an attractive place for seniors to live while sort of preserving the aesthetic of the
former religious use. And to show the board that this is an area that's walkable and accessible
for seniors, here are some of the various locations of businesses, religious institutions,
and other things that are within walkability zones from the subject lot.
This is the building that's proposed to have our addition on top of it here.
The existing rectory and the existing church building are being left alone.
The addition is just on this rear building here.
And here's a layout of how the units are going to look.
Very standard unit types to provide easy access and affordability for seniors.
It's something this neighborhood desperately needs.
And the floor plans mimic each other as they go up through the building.
and as i mentioned there are 30 units in total spread across the proposed facility
here are just some example unit types we have accessible units
that provide you know all the function for ada requirements especially for senior housing we
want to make sure that we have ada accessible units that are functional for their use and the
building is designed in that way and here are the elevations to show the board here's the addition
here um and the existing structure we have one more rendering uh that shows the board the courtyard
and sort of uh passive recreation area that will be included uh as part of that final development
we did meet with the rco and their letter of support is available here i'll blow this up a
little bit to make it easier for the board to see. But as as you could see, there was a meeting
on February 9th that took a total of 29 attendees and the vote was unanimous in support of granting
these these variances after a full community conversation. At this point, I'd like to ask
Maria Gonzalez to raise her virtual hand so that she might adopt my testimony. Maria, if you're
there, please use the raise your hand button. If she's been allowed to speak, sir. Thank you.
Can you state your name and spell for the court reporter?
Hello, my name is Maria Gonzalez, M-A-R-I-A-G-O-N-Z-A-L-E-Z. I'm the president of ASE,
a non-profit community development corporation um 501 you swear for him to tell the truth the
whole truth nothing but the truth yes i do thank you uh thank you uh maria did you have a chance
to hear my presentation this afternoon yes and do you adopt my statements as true correct in
your own testimony yes thank you uh can you just very very briefly summarize for the board
ASE's experience in developing senior housing in this area? Yes. ASE was incorporated in 1982.
Our focus and mission is in developing affordable housing for families and seniors. We have about
280 units of senior housing in the area, and we have also developed the Mercy Life Center that
supports also aging in place in our communities. And pretty much this is in line with our recent
Community Development Plan that was completed in 2016 to create more affordable rental housing
in the Sitton-Hugh and Fairhill neighborhoods. Thank you very much. Mr. Chair, we don't have
Thank you very much. Mr. Chair, we don't have anything further, but we're happy to address questions.
of anything further, but we're happy.
Questions from the board? No, Mr. Chairman. No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Sir, I see Mr. Sloan-Folks with his hand raised. I will allow him to speak at this time.
Good afternoon, Chairman, ZBA board. Sloan-Folks, Office of Councilman Maria Quinone-Sanchez.
You've already been sworn, Mr. Folks.
Thank you, sir.
The applicant, having met with the coordinating RCO and receiving a letter of support, the council member offers her support for this various request.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
I see no one else in the virtual audience.
Planning Commission.
Ron Bednar, City Planning, that's R-O-N, last name Bednar, B-E-D-N-A-R.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
This property is indicated for residential on the city plan, given the physical site condition and the documented use history.
We recommend the request of variance be granted.
Thank you.
MI 2021-005-016-147 West Tioga Street, I vote yes.
Harold Tenneri, my vote is yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
thank you thank you all very much have a good afternoon
MI 2021 004985 1500 to 14 north 15th street
Joe Goldschlack
Mr. Goldschlack has been promoted to panel sir
Hi, Mr. Goldsack, are you attorney?
No, I work for the contractor.
Okay, so do you have an attorney on this case?
Who's the client?
The client is Comcast.
I work for Fullerton Engineering.
I am an attorney licensed in Illinois.
I think we need an attorney to handle this case.
That is correct, Chair.
so mr goldslack what we're going to do is continue it and please come back with an attorney
and you can contact our office and i'll give you instructions on what your
you know what your attorney should do and things of that nature but we have to have
an attorney for a company corporation um all right even though i i was the applicant but
I understand.
Will there be, how will I be notified about the continuance date?
Our office will get a hold of you.
You'll get a new date.
If you can email me at tanya.sunket at philip.gov or the RCOZBA, we can assist you further, sir.
Thank you very kindly.
Thank you very much.
MI 2021-00-4972-3001 North Stillman Street.
Terry Scott.
sorry sir mr josell console has been promoted oh good okay thank you
good afternoon board joe console console you have been sworn uh could you please identify
your client and the relationship to the property yeah my client is maurice map the second he is uh
one of the owners of the property and he's on this call all right thank you and our vice chair
carol tenere has a few questions hi mr council do you agree to waive the reading the refusal
and stipulate to its accuracy i do have you emailed the exhibit packet consisting of
proof of ownership tax compliance a copy of the refusal or referral photos and or plans of the
property five days in advance of this hearing and have you met with the rco and do you have a letter
yes to everything okay you may proceed and your screen's up okay great
Okay, you may proceed and your screen's up.
Okay, great. 3001 North Stillman Street. I got Maurice Mapp, one of the owners with me, as previously discussed. It's 30th and Stillman. We've got the refusal, the RCO letter of support, photos and plans, and the requisite documents attached to this.
The refusal for this corner property is twofold. One, we've got a takeout restaurant being refused on the first floor of this property with a apartment above that takeout. So it's both multiple principal uses and takeout restaurant itself being prohibited.
As noted on the refusal, this property has previously been approved on the first floor for retail sale of cosmetics with an apartment above it.
It's fallen into disrepair, as you'll see in the photos.
And so we're trying to revive it, have a takeout restaurant use on the first floor and an apartment on the second floor.
The owner, Mr. Mapp's family, is in the restaurant business. We met with the RCO twice regarding the plans for the restaurant, the kind of food being served.
All the little details aren't really germane to this presentation, but the point is that there was enthusiastic support. We got the letter of support from the Community Action Group and Ms. Denise Whitaker.
It's our proofs of mailings. Here is what the outside of the property is looking like right now. There's been some fix up of the outside of it and the inside waiting for our approvals to get moving on that.
these are signs um to note uh two of the other three corners uh on this particular intersection
have uh commercial uses at them and like i said this property had a commercial use on the first
floor um it was only ever approved for that as far as i can tell um different angle some other
angles. This is pre-external rehab, like I said, like I showed you, my client fixed up the rundown
outside, so it looks nice at the moment, just the insides waiting to be worked on. There's the floor
plans included in the packet of what the takeout restaurant will look like, employee entrance,
customer entrance, and then the third door on that floor is actually a separate entrance to
apartment which has always been there uh and is visible back uh on this photo on your left the
the door all the way to to the right um with the overhang leads uh to steps that lead up to the
upstairs apartment uh there's the architectural plan for the apartment itself no refusals there
and our other documents tax clearance certificate deed and that sort of a thing um i don't believe
uh there's there's too much left to belabor here i'll i'll call my client
mr maurice map to raise his hand and adopt my testimony
are you out there yeah i'm here could you state your name and spell for the court reporter
uh maurice m-a-u-r-i-c-e map m-a-p-p second do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the
whole truth and nothing but the truth i do thank you good afternoon mr map um did you hear my
testimony just now regarding 3001 north stillman yes do you agree with what i said and do you adopt
that testimony as if it was your own yes is there anything you'd like to add uh no sir okay
questions from the board no mr chairman and mr chairman questions or comments from the virtual
audience so there's a hand raise from a number that ends in three five five two if you wish please
hello hi could you state your name and spell for the court reporter
um yes this is adrian fernandez a-d-r-i-e-n-n-e fernandez f-e-r-n-a-n-d-e-z of swan portal
neighborhood parcels association rco all right do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole
truth is nothing but the truth. Yes. Thank you. Proceed. Okay. There are two affected RCOs.
Thank you. Proceed.
Okay. There are two affected RCOs for this address, Swamp Little Neighborhood Process Association RCO and also Community Action Group RCO.
Both RCOs support this project.
We just want to assure that if it needs to be proviso'd, that the trash be kept in a container, be contained.
I believe the applicant said they would build a container on their property in the back.
and also that the single-family zoning is maintained upstairs versus multi-family zoning.
Thank you.
Thank you, Swampoodle.
Any other comments or questions from the virtual audience?
I see. No other hands, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission, Ron Bednar, City Planning.
While this property is currently indicated for residential on the city plan, given the physical circumstances of the site and the documented use history, recommended requests for variance be granted.
Thank you.
Rebecca, the provisors, we would only do trash, right?
I believe that's correct.
Thank you.
MI 2021-004972-3001-North Stillman Street, I vote yes.
Would proviso trash be stored in the appropriate manner to discuss with the owner?
Carol Tenere, my vote is yes with proviso.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with proviso.
James Snell, yes with proviso.
Ishmael Shahid, yes with proviso.
Thank you.
Thank you, Board.
MI-2021-004974-3737 North 2nd Street.
Jose La Torre.
Mr. Clinton is coming back on as a panelist, sir.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman.
Henry Clinton for the applicant. Could you spell your name for the court reporter, Mr. Clinton?
Sure. H-N-R-Y Clinton, C-L-I-N-T-O-N, 1313 South 33rd Street, FWPA, 19146.
Do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do, Mr. Chairman. Could you identify your client and their relationship with the property?
Sure. The owner of the property is 3737 South 2nd LLC, and the two principals are both on the call with me, Sean Thomas, as well as Keith Sheed, S-H-E-E-D.
Okay. Our vice chair has a few questions.
Hi, Mr. Clinton. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed the exhibit packet consisting of proof of ownership,
tax compliance, a copy of the refusal or referral, photos and replies to the property
five days in advance of this hearing? And have you met with the RCO and do you have a letter?
Yes to all of the above.
That's great. You may proceed and share your screen.
Thank you.
Is that visible enough?
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, members of the board.
I'm here on behalf of 3737 North 2nd Street, LLC.
And this is my table of contents, exhibits AA through A11, which I'll ask to be admitted into evidence.
This is our appearance statement, which is typical.
This is the refusal.
The request is for a sit-down restaurant.
As I walk through the presentation, you'll see that historically, this was a banquet facility.
Banquet facility, according to the zoning records, were approximately the year 2000 to 2021.
And prior to that, it was really an amusement entertainment site.
And I'll show you some historical records.
So the reason we're before you is because the property is in an I-2 zone.
It's industrial medium.
and we're asking for a sit-down restaurant
and the code does not permit that.
Even though the historical use
has been for something similar.
So we do have a letter of support from the RCO.
One of the caveats to the support
was a concern about parking.
And in the letter, you can see
that there is reference to the fact
that we have permission to use an adjacent property
for parking during certain events.
And I've attached a copy of that letter
for the board. This is an adjacent property at 3710, actually across the street it is 3710
10 actually across the street it is 3710 North 2nd and we have the permission to use this
North 2nd. And we have the
gentleman's parking lot for certain events. We also have a petition of support from the
surrounding neighbors and you'll see from my certification that we only had to mail out
letters believe it or not to 15 neighbors because it is a huge industrial site as you'll see from
the photograph so there really weren't a lot of surrounding neighbors but we got the bulk of
their signatures in support. So you can see this is an entirely industrial area. The zoning map
indicates it's this side of the street on Erie Avenue is industrial as is this side. And the
property is close to the intersection of 2nd and Erie. There's a high school across the street and
that's only non-industrial use that I could find. Again, this is the facility right here and you'll
see from some photographs that it used to be a banquet facility. We're not going to have a
banquet facility. We're asking for a sit-down restaurant. Just showed you some interior
photographs. Still in good shape. This is the counter area. These are the plans. Give it a
layout. It's really a first floor and a partial second floor. This is the counter area, the seating
area for booths as well as tables, and an open area, perhaps for events, for birthday parties,
christenings, showers, things of that sort. On the second floor, we're just going to have an
office area. The rest of the building is really not used. It's a roof area.
So the rest of the documents are pro forma documents we usually introduce at the zoning board hearing, tax certification, notification to surrounding neighbors, or an application for appeal.
And this is the zoning map. I just want to show the board. This is our property right here, my client's property, and the whole area in purple is an I-2 zone.
And here are some historical records just to show the board that in 1987, this was a bar restaurant that had entertainment, pinball machines, shuffle boards, pool tables.
And this is a certificate of occupancy from 2002, again, indicating a bar restaurant with live entertainment, bands, disco, et cetera.
So we're asking the board to look kindly upon this application because it doesn't really change the use per se.
It's still going to be an area where you can get a sandwich and sit down and have something to eat.
But we're not going to have the extensive use of the property that was before, which was a banquet facility.
So we're not going to affect any adjacent neighbors later air.
It's in harmony with the code. It's in harmony with what the RCO supports.
uh and we are the historical use documented historical use is consistent with the use that
we're proposing for the board today so with that i'd like to rest and entertain any questions the
board or the virtual audience may have henry would you want to bring your client on to adopt your
testimony sure mr thomas can you raise your hand and you'll be unmuted he's been allowed to speak
sir but you state your name and spell for the court reporter yes my name is sean thomas s-h-a-w-n-t-h-o-m-e-s
right do you swear a firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes i do proceed uh good afternoon mr thomas how are you all right good uh were you on the call
when i presented this project on behalf of you and mr sheet yes i was and if you had the opportunity
to testify, would you adopt my testimony as your own and as true and correct?
Yes, I will.
Thank you, Mr. Thomas.
I appreciate your time.
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I'll wait, sir.
Mr. Sloan, folks, let's put his hand up.
I will allow him to speak at this time.
Thank you.
Mr. Folks, you've been sworn before.
Just start your testimony, please.
Good afternoon, sir.
The applicant having met with the coordinating RCO and receiving a letter of support, our office offers no opposition.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
Anyone else in the virtual audience?
There are no other hands at this time.
Planning Commission?
On Bednar City Planning, while this property is currently indicated for industrial on the city
plan or proposed zoning for the site was ICMX, which would allow a sit-down restaurant by right.
was ICMX, which would allow a sit-down restaurant by right.
Therefore, we recommend perseverance be granted.
MI 2021-004974-3737 North 2nd Street, I vote yes.
Carol Tennerin, my vote is yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the board.
have a great day. Okay. You too. MI 2021-002-633-5929 North 5th Street.
Mr. Justin Crick has been promoted to panelists. He will be rejoining us shortly, sir. Okay.
Good afternoon, members of the board. Justin Crick on behalf of the applicant.
Hey, could you spell your name, please, for the court reporter?
Yes, last name K-R-I-K.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client and their relationship with the property?
Yes, my client is the Fifth Street Lounge, Philadelphia, LLC, tenant of the property represented by Earl Johnson.
The application was filed by our expediter, Betty Mann.
Okay, thank you. Our vice chair has a few questions.
Hi, Mr. Crick. Do you agree to waive the renew the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Okay. Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership tax compliance, a copy of the refusal or referral, photos under plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing, and have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
Yes, to all.
Okay, great. You may proceed and share your screen.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Members of the board, we're here today on the property located at 5929 North 5th Street.
The property is currently being used as a bar and restaurant with some food in the bar.
And it is, both stories of the property are occupied.
But what we have a refusal for is an application for assembly and entertainment to allow music
to be played on the first and second floors of the existing building and in the existing
structure the proposed use of nightclub private club is expressly prohibited in the cmx2 district
and that is what we are seeking the variance for today that's the only refusal we received
and as you can see that there was there was previously approval for this this structure
and the work done to it with soundproofing and so forth in a prior application
property is located uh generally speaking along a somewhat of a commercial corridor on north fifth
street but within a residential area surrounding it is located on a fairly large parcel of land
that from the this photograph will show you that it has a large area that was originally used for
parking but has been used now and converted approved converted to outdoor seating during
the pandemic they utilized that uh which you can see here this used to be a parking area
what excuse me council this isn't council we're not seeing the pictures oh all right i apologize
let me try that one more time all right how is this working good thank you thank you very much
i'm sorry about that let me go back and just show you so this is this is a commercial corridor
on on this side of the street there's a there's quite a few uh you know pharmacy hardware store
restaurant and this bar from an aerial view and i'll get to the closer one this is a this was the
is a parking area for the restaurant but a portion of the back of it as you'll see has become some
outdoor seating but notably we have made arrangements with kim's korean restaurant who
when they are closed in the evenings do not mind and are okay with our patrons parking in that lot
during that time again the commercial corridor and one other thing is that there was there's
another project that was presented at the same RCO meeting for a new bar or business up the street
that tied into the the concerns of the neighborhood that may be relevant for later discussion or
questioning but here's an exterior photo of the property um you can see the the outdoor area
that's been uh re repurposed but there is still some parking in front as well as parking along
as well as parking along the street frontage and we're going to get to some interior photos
the street frontage um and i'm going to get to some
again an existing bar sports bar happy hours uh whatnot and what their what the the intent is is
to have music in the form of a dj and also just allow background music on roughly three nights a
week thursday friday and saturday both on the first floor level here as well as some photos
i'll get to right now this is an there's some offices empty office space that are mainly used
by the proprietor on the second floor and or as stock room for random things but may be opened up
and want the ability to open these some of these rooms up for either private events and things of
that nature so the music would just be throughout the premises this is somewhat of a crude drawing
by the tenant, because again, the approved plans are already okay. We're just looking for music in
both of these levels. So admittedly, here's an exemplar, copy of the lease, sorry, copy of the
photos, the posting, and a tax clearance certificate. Now, admittedly, when we met with
the um rco which is the uh upper north council or coalition of community councils um they did
submit a letter of opposition in in drastic opposition stark opposition to this with with
basically a 38 to nothing in opposition however a closer look now an explanation that they provided
um really they were concerned about outdoor music which has was only carried out during the pandemic
for purpose of necessity, but is not something that is within this application or within the
desire. They were concerned with parking issues, which again, we have made some arrangements for
parking to be decreased or alleviated, but the addition of music won't necessarily change the
parking concerns that exist just from the existing bar and restaurant that is already there as of
right um but in that same respect the the applicant has agreed to you know take more measures to inform
his patrons of what they should and shouldn't do in terms of parking in the neighborhood
uh and finally a concern of the neighborhood was violent activity but um that didn't seem to be the
the primary concern because our client or the applicant maintains security private security
on site during all business hours and um and you know can only control what is done within his
premises uh and also made very note very good note that we do work with the local police department
and would be willing to handle her and hire additional security um i've received how many
what is the capacity what is the capacity yes uh occupancy we have about 75 to 100 people
occupancy limit on one floor or both that would be including both
okay and what are the days and hours of operation yep that would be um the days of operation are
seven days a week from 4 p.m to 2 a.m sometimes a little earlier on sunday if there's an event
or something in the morning in terms of sporting event or gathering that someone wants to have
um okay and the music would be approximately thursday friday and saturday evenings
for that. And when does the music end? The music would end, I believe, that would be,
I don't know that we have a time ending for it other than close of business.
I can let Mr. Johnson, who is available, answer that question if he is, you know, prepared to do
so. But my understanding is that the music would be available to the bar during its regular hours
of operation, whether it be just through an overhead PA system, but the DJ would only
be required three days and three nights a week intended.
Thank you.
And so we took into account very much what the neighborhood had said, and we were willing
to work with them and are still willing to work with them.
And then I received an understanding, and I'll let the councilperson's office speak
for themselves.
But we have agreed with the council person's office to limit the term of this with this variance with a proviso of three years, as well as to agree that there will be no outdoor music of any kind.
So the council person's office, we believe, is in support of this.
We believe that the issue with parking and some of the congestion may have gone a little beyond what we had thought since we are an existing restaurant with existing patrons, but at the same meeting, the neighborhood was entertaining a brand new type of...
but at a similar at the same meeting the neighborhood was entertaining a brand new
type of establishment that would bring in a lot more volume um so i think the the concerns of
the evening while while right um are misapplied to an existing business where the music will
likely not generate more traffic um so uh that is the general presentation and what we're looking
for in the space. Again, this is the Alpex here. And I can, if I can, I'd ask that Earl Johnson
be promoted to adopt my testimony. Mr. Earl Johnson, if you are in the audience,
please raise your, okay, here he is. Mr. Johnson has been allowed to speak. Mr. Johnson, state
your name and spell it for the court reporter? It's Earl Johnson, E-A-R-L-J-O-H-N-S-O-N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes. Proceed. Thank you. Mr. Johnson, have you had an opportunity to hear my testimony to the
board today? Yes. And would you agree that the statements I've made are true and correct to the
best of your knowledge yes and would you adopt my testimony as if it was your own yes and i would
like to ask if you have anything that you'd like to add and i know you're available for questions
but if there's anything you'd like to add at this time uh no it's not like that not right now
questions from the board uh yes mr chairman what is the trash counselor what is the trash
removal plan there is commercial trash pickup um and my notes say that it happens uh either a daily
or or multiple times a week as to the frequency of it i can let mr johnson join in but it is
commercial trash trash get picked up twice a week recycled once a week thank you any other questions
from the board? Hello, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Question or comments from the virtual audience?
I'm Mr. Chair. I have Ms. Hilary Emerson with her hand raised. I will allow her to speak at this time.
Good morning, Mr. Chair, members of the board. Hilary Emerson on behalf of Councilwoman Sherelle
parker h-i-l-a-r-y last name emerson e-m-e-r-s-o-n you swear affirm to tell the truth the whole
truth and nothing but the truth i do proceed i thank you um so the councilwoman's position is
one of um non-opposition with the provisos that mr quirk mentioned um this this was a uh this case
is a balancing act for us because we hear from the residents of their concerns on a number of
issues. We also want to ensure that our small businesses are getting the support and the
opportunity that they need to thrive. As Mr. Quick mentioned, this is a business on a commercial
corridor, but it is surrounded by residences, as you did see in the photo, both behind and across
the street as well as businesses. So at the RCO meeting the neighbors were in opposition. Two of
the biggest issues that were mentioned were the parking situation as well as outdoor music which
there were events held outdoors in the outdoor seating area because events could not be held
indoors due to the pandemic um but some neighbors were um were not happy about that um we did talk
with um the north fifth street revitalization project that provides services to the different
businesses on the corridors as kind of a corridor manager um and they they did not um they had not
received um any significant complaints from residences or businesses about this business
but they did think that keeping the music indoors would be better than having any outdoor music,
which is one of the provisos. And we checked with the 35th Police District about violent crime in
the area, and the numbers were very, very low, and there haven't been any major incidences in this
area in about two years. I mean, like, in this very immediate area at this address. So just to
reiterate the provisos that were agreed to. We'd like the music limited to the interior of the
building and a temporary variance that would expire May 1st, 2025. Thank you.
Any other comments from the virtual audience?
There we have a Mr. Robert Trum with his hand raised.
Sir, we have a Mr. Robert Trum with his hand raised. I can allow him to speak at this time.
Why, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter?
Robert Trum, R-O-B-E-R-T-T-R-A-U-M.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Proceed.
Yes, I'm representing a few of the neighbors on my side of the block. I live across the street from this.
proposed
restaurant
whatever you would like to call it
the parking is atrocious
we have nowhere
to park once this place opens
every Friday
Thursday, Friday, Saturday night
there is nowhere to park
you cannot leave your house
and expect to come back to a parking spot
and this is before
the proposed
club venue whatever they're going to call that a block north of this this is just for our block
right here on 5905th street and on widener as well because there's another woman that i speak
to regularly on wider street that the people are just parking right in in the driveway blocking
our driveway we have no parking anywhere and what we can't even get into our driveways once
this place is open they say they're going to do something but they haven't done anything yet
sir yes is that the end of your testimony yes thank you very much for calling in we appreciate
your input. Any other comments from the virtual audience? Sir, Ms. Kathleen Karen with her hand
raised. I have allowed her to speak. Would you please state your name and spell for the court
reporter? Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman. My name is Kathleen Karen, K-A-T-H-L-E-E-N-K-E-R-I-N. I am
the pastor at St. Paul's Evangelical Lutheran Church, which is within the block of this
establishment. I am here to speak. Just one moment, Pastor. Do you swear or affirm to tell
the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth? I do, sir. Thank you. Proceed. I'm here to speak
on behalf of the residents. I was not, unfortunately, able to attend that Q&A meeting
with the residents. However, one of my parishioners did come and chat with me for quite some time
afterwards, and she did attend. She is also on Widener. She has had some very awful situations.
Yes? I'm sorry, Chair. I just wanted to make sure that the witness is speaking in her behalf,
not someone else's. Only an attorney can do that. I am speaking on my behalf. I am actually
speaking on behalf of St. Paul's Lutheran Church. I'm the pastor, so I would think that would be
all right. I am just simply, I guess, agreeing with the gentleman ahead of me with those same
concerns. There was a question raised, I believe, from the board about trash. The trash is a
difficult situation and especially at the church uh the fifth street revitalization team um i do
i am aware of them work with them they have some wonderful people who come and clean
further down the block towards the library we do have some assistance but i will tell you the
trash situation in our even on my own property um is greatly increased by those evenings when
the people who come out of the lounge come and sit, which we are totally happy to have them sit
on our property. Unfortunately, they leave what they eat behind whatever trash is there. So in
the pickups, you know, it didn't seem to be that the gentleman was too sure when they were. It would
be good if they could be increased. You know, I'm not going to go through every single list, but
as you did see there where everyone in that meeting was opposed to the increase in this
organization. Music, I understand they were soundproof. So, you know, I would like to see
no music outside, which that also seemed a little unclear in the lawyer's presentation.
I would just like to voice my disagreement and agreement with the community and disagreement
with this going forward they already have a venue um it's disappointing to me that um the the homes
It's disappointing to me that the homes are very, very close, and the parking is very, very difficult.
are very very close
And this makes it much more difficult for the people who live in this community.
I appreciate your time, sir.
Thank you. Thank you, Pastor. We appreciate you calling in.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
I see no other hands, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission.
we're on bed in our city planning this property is indicated for commercially mixed use on the
city plan our adopted comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing zoning
at this location the proposed use is not permitted in cmx 2.5 the applicant has not demonstrated
evidence of physical hardship that would prevent them from using the property as per the zoning
code. The Planning Commission, therefore the Planning Commission recommends that the Board
deny the variance. MI 2021-002633-5929 North 5th, I vote no. My vote is no.
Thomas Holliman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is no.
Ishmael Shahidi, my vote is no.
Thank you.
MI 2021-001633, 5928 Walnut Street, Leo Movahill, Attorney.
Mr. Mulvihill has been promoted to panelist.
Mr. Mulvihill, state your name and spell it for the court reporter.
Certainly.
It's Leo Mulvihill.
That's M-U-L, V as in Victor, I-H-I-L-L.
Address, 937 East Westmoreland, Philadelphia, 19134.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do.